[EM] Random and systematic

Stephane Rouillon stephane.rouillon at sympatico.ca
Sat Feb 24 08:35:56 PST 2007


Very interesting.
Analogous idea can be applied to non-random election methods
in order to discreminate in the case of ties.
thus different computers can obtain identical results, allowing
verification of the counting procedure for complex
method like STV for example.

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a écrit :

> At 11:34 PM 2/15/2007, Stephane Rouillon wrote:
> >Sorry to target an honest idea,
> >but my main critic about random methods is the fact that
> >results are not reproductible. Thus, the incentive for fraud
> >is huge and the electors confidence within the system should drop
> >with time...
>
> It depends. What is interesting about the proposal is that the
> randomness isn't like, for example, Random Ballot. Rather, it moves
> between two alternative methods, each one of which alone is as good
> or better than existing standard methods. By doing this, it
> encourages honest voting. But it isn't going to reverse the decision
> of a majority, for example, as long as both methods obey the Majority
> Criterion.
>
> Fraud becomes possible with this system if it is possible to
> manipulate the selection. But such fraud could be quite risky, and
> would not be as rewarding as ordinary election fraud. And it is
> possible to arrange the determination of a random number in a public
> way, such that it cannot be anticipated or manipulated except through
> a conspiracy of all parties involved.
>
> For example, all candidates (and possibly some others) provide a
> sealed envelope with a random number in it, say a four-digit random
> number, chosen by whatever process the person chooses. The envelopes
> are collected at a single meeting, in public. The numbers are summed
> and the least-significant two digits are the number used to make the
> method selection.
>
> In order to predict the result, you have to be able to control *all*
> contributions. If even one escapes you, you have nothing.
>
> And if all the candidates wanted to control the outcome by agreement,
> well, more power to them!




More information about the Election-Methods mailing list