PDA

View Full Version : Is it possible to achieve a 100% fair and accurate voting structure?




nayjevin
04-16-2009, 03:12 PM
How do you have a truly fair vote?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As close as I can come is:

- Each resident on any given street gathers in a central location.

- Each person, one at a time, moves to the front of the room and drops his or her marble in the jar of a favorite candidate. that marble has the voter's identification on it, and each voter is responsible to provide their own marble(more on this later)

- the jars are hidden from those who have not yet voted, but after voting the voter can see the jars. the jars could be opaque, but after voting, a set of glasses that can see through the opacity could be provided so that those who have already voted are the only ones able to oversee future votes (or some other suitable method wherein voter is not influenced by previous votes)

- Perhaps one person randomly drawn from a hat from another street can oversee the first vote.

- when all have voted, a naked person who does not have any sleight of hand abilities pulls out the marbles one at a time to verify one person = one vote

- results are reported to a neighborhood committee and published in media outlets for verification. neighborhood results are reported to state committee and published, etc

* Problems *

- One must have a name to do this. :eek: This in and of itself is a labeling of the individual for identification purposes = loss of liberty. one should be able to do whatever is wanted with his or her name, change it at will, or have none at all.

- a person could go to the street next to them and claim they live there and vote again. :eek: again, there is no stopping this without identifying individuals = loss of liberty. Even worse, people sometimes have the same names, so perhaps numbers would have to be used :eek::eek:

- the jars cost money, the marbles cost money. one might not be able to afford their own marble. in this case, some might be gifted marbles for political interests, whereas others might not be able to come up with one based strictly on their resources / connections.

* potential solutions *

- tax folks for the purpose of supplying the marbles and jars :eek:

- ask for donations to fund purchase of enough marbles and jars <-- what if the money just isn't there?

- have a different identification number for each person, but discard it after every election. :cool: not bad.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ultimately, I see no way to have a fair vote without compromising individual liberty to some extent.

Thoughts?

nate895
04-16-2009, 03:44 PM
There is no way to have a 100% fool-proof voting system. Simple human error will lead to at least a few ballots in the thousands that are counted to be counted wrong. The best we can have is a system where everyone uses paper ballots and they are counted in public.

BTW, what is your opposition to names? That's just going insane with "liberty," you have to have a name. There is NO way around having a name. You can't go around changing your name, either, it is called "fraud" since you are lying about who you are.

nayjevin
04-16-2009, 04:04 PM
There is no way to have a 100% fool-proof voting system. Simple human error will lead to at least a few ballots in the thousands that are counted to be counted wrong. The best we can have is a system where everyone uses paper ballots and they are counted in public.

BTW, what is your opposition to names? That's just going insane with "liberty," you have to have a name. There is NO way around having a name. You can't go around changing your name, either, it is called "fraud" since you are lying about who you are.

well, i wouldn't change my name, unless I found it no longer represented me -- but the Native American tradition does a better job of using names in the proper way, IMO

it's not going insane. it's not compromising! now, I'm not about to start a protest against surnames, but it's silly to not admit that being born into a situation where someone else has chosen your name represents a degree of liberty lost.

JdotRdot
04-16-2009, 04:19 PM
a number of people have suggested paying for the privilege to vote...makes sense to me, weeds out the lazy & uninterested
i think $100 or so should be enough to deter the fucktards of society

nate895
04-16-2009, 05:25 PM
well, i wouldn't change my name, unless I found it no longer represented me -- but the Native American tradition does a better job of using names in the proper way, IMO

it's not going insane. it's not compromising! now, I'm not about to start a protest against surnames, but it's silly to not admit that being born into a situation where someone else has chosen your name represents a degree of liberty lost.

And most Americans look away and shake their head after hearing many promising things from us libertarians. It's a name. You only change them to avoid crazies or criminals, or if you just hate it that much you are willing to file a court motion and have it registered that "John Smith" is now "Bill Jones."

nayjevin
04-16-2009, 06:36 PM
There is no way to have a 100% fool-proof voting system. Simple human error will lead to at least a few ballots in the thousands that are counted to be counted wrong. The best we can have is a system where everyone uses paper ballots and they are counted in public.

I tend to agree. Paper ballots are good.


And most Americans look away and shake their head after hearing many promising things from us libertarians. It's a name. You only change them to avoid crazies or criminals, or if you just hate it that much you are willing to file a court motion and have it registered that "John Smith" is now "Bill Jones."

why are you talking about the status quo and not the OP? why did you take one tiny part of the OP and blow it out of proportion?

I ask you this..

do you agree or disagree that letting someone else choose your name is a loss of liberty?

nayjevin
04-16-2009, 06:38 PM
a number of people have suggested paying for the privilege to vote...makes sense to me, weeds out the lazy & uninterested
i think $100 or so should be enough to deter the fucktards of society

the constitution required land ownership to secure a vote, to provide that voters have a vested interest in what they vote on, as I understand it.

it is a difficult subject (and perhaps one that doesn't require fucktardanalysis) :)

nate895
04-16-2009, 07:34 PM
do you agree or disagree that letting someone else choose your name is a loss of liberty?

It is not. It's your name. Your parents give it to you when you are born. It has worked for thousands of years and no one has complained about having parents name children. If your name is really that bad, go and get it changed through the proper channels.

StayTrue
04-17-2009, 08:27 AM
I think there should be some sort of system where voters are given some type of item that has a measured weight to it, and the votes would be counted by scales.

No vote counting would be necessary, just look at the weight that each candidate amassed.

Original_Intent
04-17-2009, 08:47 AM
I got an email for a seminar my company is putting on regarding some new idea of vote verification so that every person can verify that their vote was indeed counted. The brief that I read on it sounded pretty impressive. If it is as good as it sounds, I doubt it will ever actually be implemented.

Conza88
04-17-2009, 09:01 AM
Is it possible to achieve a 100% fair and accurate voting structure?

Yes. It's called the market. Everything else fails.