[EM] No. Condorcet and Hare do not share the same problem with computational complexity and process transparency.

[robert bristow-johnson]

> On 03/20/2024 5:40 PM EDT Closed Limelike Curves <closed.limelike.curves at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> (Michael, I'd suggest not paying too much attention to rb-j when he gets like this. He's a Condorcet partisan, and happy to burn down a good reform just because it's not ideal.)
> 

It's hard to correct entrenched flaws when there is so much denial surrounding them.

> The issue with IRV isn't that it can't be audited; clearly it can.

Audits, to be fully trustworthy, need a redundancy of data sources.  Otherwise the data can be cooked that the auditors get and no one knows the difference.

> The problem is many people won't trust the auditors. And I actually don't think they should—not because I think the auditors are lying, but because democracy is only safe so long as we make every effort to safeguard it.
> 

Every reasonable effort.  Removing redundancy in the source of audit data is not reasonable.  At least one data path that is redundant is needed.  Removing that last redundant data path means that no redundancy continues to exist.

> An election without subtotals is effectively closed-source, unscientific. I can't reproduce it, because I don't have the data. This would be a major difference compared to today's elections, where I can prove or disprove an election was fraudulent or miscounted using nothing but public data.
> 

Hurray!

> For example, take this great diagram from the Economist:
> 
> This plot shows precinct-level vote totals for Putin, and it conclusively proves his election was fraudulent. Polling stations reported numbers ending in 0 and 5 far more often than can be explained by chance, implying these numbers are just made-up. There's also clear evidence of ballot-box stuffing: Putin gets huge vote totals in the elections where "turnout" is close to 100%, suggesting many of those votes simply weren't real.

Is this Benford's law being depicted?  I don't get the ridge at 5.

--

r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

.
.
.