On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Tim Starling <[email protected]>wrote:
> Brian wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Tim Starling <[email protected] > >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. > [...] > > > > 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. > > My hope is that the opposite is true. I'm interested in building > protections against attacks such as vote-buying into our software, so > that we can have wider participation in elections without leaving the > system open to subversion. Ultimately the decision is not up to me, > but I don't want technical deficiencies to be used as arguments > against wider participation. > > -- Tim Starling > That is great to hear, and I do apologize. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
