[EM] Question on RCV/IRV multi-seat method used in Minneapolis

[Kathy Dopp]

> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:58:13 +0100
> From: "James Gilmour" <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [EM] Question on RCV/IRV multi-seat method used in
>        Minneapolis

>
> Kathy's comments above indicate an interesting difference of concerns.  Precinct counting has not been practised in the UK (or

Thanks for the detailed description of counting methods used in the
UK. It sounds like a good system, and I may forward some of it to
folks.  Yes, I agree that keeping track of all the piles and
sub-groups of ballots and how much they are numerically worth (given
the vote transfer value method) is the hard part.

> From: "Raph Frank" <raphfrk at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [EM] Question on RCV/IRV multi-seat method used in
>        Minneapolis

>
> This is similar in Ireland, confidence in the count is high.  The
> electoral register on the other hand isn't trusted quite so much.

Unfortunately in most US states, we have utterly SECRET ballot
security procedures and no publicly verifiable ballot reconciliation,
so that no one can know if the ballots have been tampered with,
substituted, properly handled, or what.

In addition of course, about 35% of the US uses the e-ballot voting
systems that can not be ensured to be accurate or audited with
confidence because there are at least four ways to rig them that no
post-election manual audit could detect, as shown in a film by
computer security students:

http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~seclab/projects/voting/

Cheers,

Kathy