Demorep & ballot-tampering

Mon Jan 21 15:53:53 PST 2002

Mr. Ossipoff wrote-

What happened was that, after the polls
closed, and after the ballots were counted and the results announced,
the ballots were available on disk, as will soon be the case, if
it isn't already. Someone noticed thereby that their participation in
the election caused the election of someone whom they voted lower
than the person who'd have won if they hadn't voted.
D-  Thanks for the clarification.

How did such *someone* note that it was his/her vote that had such a result 
???   By specially marking his/her ballot ??? --- generally yet another 
election law felony 

How many voters were in this election (so that such someone could know that 
it was his/her *unique* vote that changed things) ??? Under 5  ??? 5 or more 
That is --- was such someone among 2 or more voters who voted the same way ???

See my standard mantra about adding C to existing A and B.  

Some bad stuff (participation or whatever) may happen to ANY one choice 
depending on the tiebreaker being used when there are 3 or more choices.

More standard mantra for the single winner case- 

A choice does or does not get a YES majority.
A choice is or is not a Condorcet Winner
If there is NO CW, then the highest/earliest YES majority will suffice for 
mere mortals (noting various YES intensity levels -- 50.01 to 100.00 percent) 
(noting the contingent nature of any 2nd or later choice vote --- being done 
only if an earlier choice vote does not produce a winner).

Standard example-

All YES votes

34 ABC
33 BCA
32 CAB



Earliest majorities (1st plus 2nd place votes)

A 66
B 67
C 65

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list