> On 4 Jun 2015, at 00:41, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 June 2015 at 19:11, Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net 
> <mailto:em...@mikepeel.net>> wrote:
>>> On 3 Jun 2015, at 23:48, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 3 June 2015 at 18:42, Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> wrote:
>>>>> By the way, my understanding is that the practice of generating a
>> public
>>>>> list of voters who cast ballots, while keeping the nature of their
>> votes
>>>>> private, is relatively common in election processes in general. In the
>>>>> United States, political parties use this information for their "get
>> out
>>>>> the vote" campaigns so that they know which of their likely supporters
>>>> have
>>>>> yet to vote.
>>>> In UK political elections I think that would be illegal...{{citation
>>>> needed}}
>>>> They certainly exist in Canada, and I'm quite certain they exist in the
>> UK
>>> as well, because that's how the official poll watchers (or scrutineers,
>> as
>>> we call them in Canada) know who to "get out" when getting out the
>>> vote.  They don't get published online, but there is a right to examine
>>> the list of individuals who can vote at the office of the local senior
>>> election official for a few weeks afterward, and then at the national
>>> election office once any challenges have been completed.  Of course in
>>> places where voting is mandatory, the failure to vote is going to be
>> public.
>> Wow. I'm very far from being an expert on the UK voting system, but my
>> understanding is that although the list of who can vote may be made public
>> (where voters have agreed to this), who has not yet voted (or, after the
>> fact, who has not voted) would never be made public. In the UK, election
>> scrutineers would only be involved in reviewing votes that had been cast,
>> not who had not voted.
> It occurred to me that there's this really great online reference source
> called Wikipedia that's generally pretty accurate when it comes to things
> like this, so I looked up "Electoral roll".  In the UK, "[a]fter an
> election a 'Marked Register' can be inspected, which is a copy of the
> register used for the election with a mark by each elector that has
> voted."[1]
> As I said...while it's generally accurate, sometimes it's incomplete.  I
> note the absence of any information about Canada there, although it is
> fairly close to the UK system as discussed in the article.
> Risker/Anne

Interesting! It doesn't seem to be referenced in the enwp article (I've just 
tagged it as needing a citation), but I'll look into in on the morrow!

(All I wanted to do when I sent my first email was to point out that it wasn't 
clearly indicated that the record of who voted in this election would be made 
public, even though I have no issue with it being public, but let's argue about 
this anyway!)

(Apologies for the sarcasm. It's been a long day.)

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to