Re: Random choice. (was Re: Accuracy and repeatability...)

From: charlie strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Thu Feb 03 2005 - 18:48:03 CST

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Cherlin <cherlin@pacbell.net>
Sent: Feb 3, 2005 4:35 PM
To: ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net
Subject: Random choice. (was Re: [OVC-discuss] Accuracy and repeatability...)

On Wednesday 02 February 2005 18:32, charlie strauss wrote:
> At some point any election is a tie in the sense that both
> candidates are equally qualified and desired in the eyes of
> the voters. That is a large fraction voted for each so by
> definition they are qualified regradless of other measures of
> their intellect and ability. Thus selecting one of them by a
> game of chance is not an affront to democracy.
>
> Since this would eliminate almost all challenges to an
> election

I doubt that. What if a candidate misses the random choice cutoff
by 10 votes?

ANSWER: the cutoff is graded. Your game of chance is proportional to how far you are from the "cutoff". Example the cut-off is 5000 votes. One candidate wins by 4500 votes. So the odds in the game of chance are 4500:500 favoring the winner. If the margin is a healthy one then dogfighting over handfulls of votes only trivially alters the odds.

> and elminate any need to recount on suffieintly
> accurate machines

Never. "Any measurable error rate is too high." Bill Godbout

ANSWER: Uh did you read the logic I laid out. Machines more accurate than the ability of election to decide voter and citizen intent are meaningless. to re-cap but one point if voters made errors 0.5% of the time then having machines more accurate than the expected deivation of the voters errors would be meaningless. You would precisley know an innaccurate number.

> it solves a heck of a lot of issues in
> voting and promotes public confidence that no swindle took
> place.

ROTFLOL. Look, if you want random choices...

Its not adding randomness it is removing bias. It's a more sophisticated decision criteria then being a slave to the whims of the weather and traffic which are the random elements we have now. I am replacing these random but non-fair elements with fair and random elements. The degree of randomness is not enlarged but the bias is reduced. Much better.

-- 
Edward Cherlin
Generalist & activist--Linux, languages, literacy and more
"A knot! Oh, do let me help to undo it!"
--Alice in Wonderland
http://cherlin.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Sun Feb 27 17:17:03 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 27 2005 - 17:17:13 CST