96 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Since we mentioned the accidental colour similarity between STV's signs and NDP signs, some STV signs once located next to NDP candidate signs have been moved. In some cases they've been placed next to Liberal and Green signs. Perhaps this is just a coincidence, but it's a good move on whoever chose to shuffle the placements.

[Caramia]

In the States the main problem was with computer voting stations instituted in areas where the population was barely literate. They couldn't figure out how to work the machines. Very different from a computer tallying system which has so many checks and balances and people overseeing each step it would be very hard to screw with.

[phx]

Software has failed and had problems, but there is no recorded example of tampering the the software to change the results. There have been examples of ballot stuffing in recent years with the analog systems.

Indeed.

Ballot box stuffing on a significant scale is most likely to be detected, while software tampering is easier to get away with.

[Bernard]

Indeed.

Ballot box stuffing on a significant scale is most likely to be detected, while software tampering is easier to get away with.

So you are saying since no one has ever come up with an example, therefore it is occurring?

Do you have any idea how HUGE a task it would be to rig the software in an election? The scale of people that would have to involved would impossible for it to remain quiet. Software is complex and needs large teams of people to develop it to the point where you get 99.999% accuracy, which is what is functionally required for electoral software. How would you make a change to the software and not have it noticed at some point in the testing?

What you are suggesting is functionally impossible. If it was possible, the person that did it would have much better things to do like set up software that empties bank accounts and retire very, very rich to some remote island. The possibility is so remote of this occurring that I would bet on the second coming happening first.

How many people do think work on a project to develop software to read ballots and tabulate the results?

[jklymak]

So you are saying since no one has ever come up with an example, therefore it is occurring?

Do you have any idea how HUGE a task it would be to rig the software in an election? The scale of people that would have to involved would impossible for it to remain quiet. Software is complex and needs large teams of people to develop it to the point where you get 99.999% accuracy, which is what is functionally required for electoral software. How would you make a change to the software and not have it noticed at some point in the testing?

What you are suggesting is functionally impossible. If it was possible, the person that did it would have much better things to do like set up software that empties bank accounts and retire very, very rich to some remote island. The possibility is so remote of this occurring that I would bet on the second coming happening first.

How many people do think work on a project to develop software to read ballots and tabulate the results?

I don't know a lot about this, but a lot of reputable computer scientists disagree with you. I'm having trouble thinking of an easier computing task than counting ballots. I dont' see why any company would need more than one engineer to write the software to tabulate the votes in as complex a manner as you want. Computers are very good at counting. Because the programs are relatively simple it is also a relatively simple task to corrupt them.

http://usacm.acm.org.../index.php?p=73

[Bernard]

I don't know a lot about this, but a lot of reputable computer scientists disagree with you. I'm having trouble thinking of an easier computing task than counting ballots. I dont' see why any company would need more than one engineer to write the software to tabulate the votes in as complex a manner as you want. Computers are very good at counting. Because the programs are relatively simple it is also a relatively simple task to corrupt them.

http://usacm.acm.org.../index.php?p=73

Counting ballots is easy, reading the ballots is not easy.

[Lover Fighter]

I honestly didn't believe 60% of British Columbians would vote in favour of partisan politics and only 40% would vote in favour of electoral reform. My only reasoning is that those who voted against it did not fully understand it (although I will never know why if you don't understand something, you should vote against it instead of finding out about it) and just listened to the false arguments from the NO STV camp.

[Phil McAvity]

^Because far too many people are scared of change, even if that change is an improvement. That and many people are too lazy to learn about STV because it's a lot easier to just mark "no" on a ballot than actually take some time and effort to learn what STV is.

Sadly, i'm not really surprised that STV went down in flames this time. I figured if it didn't pass in '05 after two totally lopsided elections back to back, it had little chance this time.

[Nparker]

It appears the voters in Victoria-Beacon Hill passed BC-STV. Elections BC reports those in support at 61.67%. At least I know my neighbours are not complete idiots.

[Nparker]

If seats were based on popular vote:

BC Liberals - 46% popular vote = 39 seats
BC NDP - 42% popular vote = 35 (almost 36 seats)
Green Party - 8% popular vote = 7 seats

And yet people still can't see why we need something other than FPTP?

[mat]

Province wide it appears only 38% voted for STV - far less than the previous election. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/bcvotes2009/

Numbers are still coming in, but this looks like a big defeat for electoral reform.

[mat]

Is Bernard on suicide watch? Poor guy must be pulling his hair out after all the work in promoting STV, and to get only 39%.

[Bernard]

Is Bernard on suicide watch? Poor guy must be pulling his hair out after all the work in promoting STV, and to get only 39%.

Way too many years of my life were dedicated to electoral reform. On September 11th 2001 I drove from Lillooet to Vancouver because some people were thinking of forming a fair vote Canada chapter - sort of gives you the idea of how obsessed I have been.

I have been active on this issue since the 1980s and made a major part of my political life since 1993.

In 2005 I put in 15 hours days for three months on the referendum.

I am not a happy camper it was defeated so badly, still even being trounced this time, it still did better at the polls than MMP did in PEI and Ontario.

My 14 year old son Daniel has accepted his destiny to move the issue forward and be ready to lead the electoral reform forces in 2040 when we will realistically have our next kick at the can in Canada. I will be in my mid 70s and cranky by then.

The 2009 election results show that each major party is stronger in the seats they hold, only 21 seats had the winner win by less than 10% in this election. In 64 ridings in the next election there will be no serious race at all.

Though here in Victoria we will see very strong races in three ridings next time around.

The electoral math of the current electoral districts will mean that the NDP will have beat the Liberals in the popular vote in 2013 by about three percentage points to have a chance to form a government.

[phx]

STV has been rejected yet again:

The UK has voted overwhelmingly to reject changing the way MPs are elected - dealing a bitter blow to Nick Clegg on top of heavy Lib Dem poll losses.

The final result put the Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 69.1%.

more

[jklymak]

STV has been rejected yet again:


The final result put the Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 69.1%.

more

Yes, well perhaps the Brit's math isn't good enough to handle more than two parties.

[sebberry]

Yes, well perhaps the Brit's math isn't good enough to handle more than two parties.

I'm a Brit and my maths isn't very good at all. So you may be onto something.

[Bernard]

The UK rejected AV, the voting system used in most of Australia and was used in BC in 1952 and 1953. AV is a ranked ballot method of electing people but is not a proportional representation system. STV is the proportional representation system of a ranked ballot.

AV is the system the BC Liberals and the BC NDP just used in their leadership races. Neither party was willing to use First Past the Post even though the result would have been the same as the AV result.

AV suffered in the UK because the Conservatives were fundamentally against as was most of the Labour party. Many electoral reform activists voted no because they want a proportional system.

There is a reasonable hope in the UK for a PR system because they already use many different forms. Among others, the UK uses STV in Northern Ireland, MMP in Wales, a party list system for the European elections, and a variation on MMP in Scotland. People in much of the UK get to vote in multiple different ways in different elections