Random choice (was Re: exit polls vs. election results)

From: Edward Cherlin <cherlin_at_pacbell_dot_net>
Date: Tue May 17 2005 - 23:17:51 CDT

On Tuesday 17 May 2005 15:40, Ron Crane wrote:
> I prefer publicly-witnessed random choice, since
> it's easy for the public to understand and to verify,

To understand in a basic way, yes. To verify, no. It is difficult
for statistics professionals to verify randomness. I know of
many ways to fudge a seemingly-random process, and the experts
know many more.

This is not an argument against having public witnesses. By all
means, let us have yet another open government process. But let
us not rely very much on the witnesses for verification.

-- 
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
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:40 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT