On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Tim Starling <tstarl...@wikimedia.org>wrote:
> Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data > being released, since it allows vote-buying. Even if the numbers given > by voters are reduced to the smallest values which still give the same > rankings, with 18 candidates there are 18 factorial possible > orderings. That number is sufficiently higher than the number of > voters that a party wishing to buy votes can specify a voter-specific > ticket with some random rankings, and be reasonably assured that if > that ticket appears in the final unencrypted dump, then the contract > was fulfilled and money can be transferred to the voter. > > In 2008 the unencrypted votes were rapidly released, but I was not > involved in that decision. > > This year, I don't think I have been asked directly to provide this > data, but it seems that the Board and election committee is in favour > of it being released, and nobody else has offerred to produce the > data. So I just wrote the relevant script, and am now testing it, so > the results will be available to the committee and the Board shortly. > > -- Tim Starling > This kind of fear mongering attitude is why we can't allow more members of the community to vote. You'd rather spread FUD about vote buying than design a system that allows the largest number of community members to vote. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l