[EM] Reading rangevoting.org/VotMach.html

[Dave Ketchum]

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:58:34 -0600 Jan Kok wrote, responding to my words:
...

> 
>>Jan Kok proposes Range Voting (RV), claiming "it is fully compatible with
>>all existing voting machines".  I have to question this claim since RV,
>>
> 
> See http://rangevoting.org/VotMach.html
> 
> 
>>like RC, requires that the voter attach a number to each voted for
>>candidate.  BUT, what does a difference of two in range mean?  Each voter
>>has to decide intent; counting will decide meaning - let us stay with RC
>>which provides needed meaning without excess complexity.
>>


So I read and throw rocks, thinking some should connect.  I read of using 

multiple levers on New York style machines that I am familiar with.


Agreed that for a special election for filling one office, ten levers 
could be used for each candidate - but who cares.  General elections are 
what counts.

Our many columns and rows seems like a lot, til you try to arrange a 
ballot neatly.  Cannot be done if there are enough candidates and enough 
offices.  So you squeeze - has happened that a loser went to court 
complaining that he lost because of the poor quality of the squeezing.

So, the RV promoters would have us install extra voting machines.  No 
sale, for then there would be trouble making sure all the voters got to 
all the machines.

Must have been thought of before, for we have a law requiring that the 
WHOLE ballot be on one "face", thus making sure the voter can see it all.

BTW, except for its usage in the current debate I dislike this law, for it 
forbids obvious optimization in new voting machines.
====

Approval voting can be done on any machine able to do Plurality? 
Probably, but neither Jan nor I really care.

HAVA is demanding new voting machines.  With proper planning and 
procurement these could have whatever capabilities are useful.

IRV counting is an impossible problem for multiple precincts?  Disagreed 
for, at each precinct there could be a count of how many times each 
pattern gets voted.  This summary could be passed to the machine doing totals.

Condorcet, done properly, is easier.  Total activity for a precinct could 
be reported in an array - both for public reporting and for passing up for 
totals.

Even with RV, each precinct's totals must be reported to whatever does 
district totals.

Agreed DRE machines have earned an unacceptable quantity of horror 
stories.  NOT agreed that these failures need to happen.

ROM - I remember that as holding definitions of instructions such as ADD 
and DVD.  I remember proposing, and getting, an "update array" instruction 
- big because the array was complex, possible because the task was 
constant, and useful because eliminating much "get next instruction" time 
via use of ROM brought the job inside the ability of the proposed computer.

There could be another memory level - perhaps not ROM, updatable by those 
authorized, but not updatable by others.

-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.