[EM] IRV vs Plurality (Dave Ketchum)

[robert bristow-johnson]

On Jan 15, 2010, at 11:34 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:

> On Jan 15, 2010, at 7:51 PM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>
>> Imagine sending all your ballots nationwide to DC for manual counting
>> to check the outcome of a Presidential election. We'll simply let the
>> GW administration, for instance, count the results in his own IRV
>> election!
>
> That's something of a non sequitur. Anyone with all the ballot  
> files (every state, for example, or anyone else) could do the count.

and, in fact, it can be decentralized to the extent it is now.  each  
state could have their central place, and in turn, each county, each  
precinct.   the entire tree could be a public record on the internet  
that has links to child nodes or parent node.  with 3 credible  
candidates there are 9 piles to have to maintain.  each precinct  
sorts the ballots into one of 9 piles and counts it and puts the 9  
numbers up in this public place on the web.  everyone can check their  
own node to see that it isn't misreported.  i do not see why,  
physically, it would be more vulnerable to attack by the government  
in power that what is presently the case.  it's a factor of 9/2 more  
numbers to keep secure with that ranked ballot.

each state, each little government would be responsible to confirm  
their precinct totals on the map and everybody gets to look at it.   
what's particularly insecure about that?

--

r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."