2066: "Ballot Selfies"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

x7eggert
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 6:55 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby x7eggert » Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:01 am UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:
x7eggert wrote:That's why it's important to have Sabbath days.
So your idea to help the poor is to cut their hours?


They are poor because of having long hours. They are poor because of doing cheap labor on off days instead of better wages on work days.

I'd suppose you're imagining that workers don't have the option to vote+short break/keep working and have the choice vote/keep job; they don't, the law requires employers to grant reasonable absences for voting to anyone that requests it. (with variations because we have 56 sets of laws)

Also they have the power to hire and fire and off cause the fire is completely unrelated to voting.

Mandatory sabbath laws wouldn't just restructure service jobs, but it would eliminate a good fraction of them; being as that the point of them is for someone to be working while other people aren't.


If these service jobs were as good as you claim, the people would be well off by doing them, and they would be greeted with honor. Instead and usually, they are wage slaves. Even if there is additional pay, it's deduced from the normal pay.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Sun Nov 11, 2018 4:49 pm UTC

x7eggert wrote:They are poor because of having long hours.
So they can become rich by working less? This new learning amazes me - tell me again how sheep's bladders can be used to predict earthquakes.

They are poor because the work they do is not valued enough by society the work that is not valued enough by society is the work that they do.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

x7eggert
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 6:55 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby x7eggert » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:55 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They are poor because of having long hours.
So they can become rich by working less? This new learning amazes me - tell me again how sheep's bladders can be used to predict earthquakes.

They are poor because the work they do is not valued enough by society the work that is not valued enough by society is the work that they do.

Jose


It's not valued because the one man works long hours at unattractive times and people say: If he was worthy, he would not.

(Also sheep containing sheep bladders are known to become agitated before earthquakes).

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4948
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Pfhorrest » Sun Nov 11, 2018 7:43 pm UTC

The point is that poor service workers working long hours at crappy low-paying jobs aren't going to become better-off just by working shorter hours at those same crappy low-paying jobs. Just shortening their hours isn't going to fix the things that compel them to work long hours. You have to fix the crappy low pay in order to allow them to work less, not force them to work less and expect that to magically raise their pay.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:17 pm UTC

x7eggert wrote:It's not valued because the one man works long hours at unattractive times and people say: If he was worthy, he would not.
No, not at all.

First of all, it's the work that is valued or not, not the person. And the work is not valued because it can be obtained inexpensively, or can be easily done without. It can be obtained inexpensively because the set of people who are qualified to do that work is vast. Work that is expensive is usually expensive because the set of people who can do the work is small, either because the work requires special skills, abilities, risks, experience, or is artificially restricted, either by union or laws, to support the asking price.

It's what people are willing to pay for the job, not for the worker, that matters.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

x7eggert
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 6:55 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby x7eggert » Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:27 pm UTC

They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4948
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Pfhorrest » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:01 pm UTC

x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.

Or their quality of life will go down 25%.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3659
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Soupspoon » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:11 pm UTC

x7eggert wrote:(Also sheep containing sheep bladders are known to become agitated before earthquakes).

Sheep not containing sheep bladders are also liable to be agitated. At the lack of sheep bladder, mostly.

Mikeski
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Mikeski » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:15 pm UTC

kdb wrote:In our Austrian [...] election [...] somehow the mail-in envelopes for the re-election had defective glue... ("gluegate").


As an American, I'd just like to say that I find it humorous that other nations also use "-gate" naming for their political scandals. The hotel break-in heard 'round the world.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3659
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Soupspoon » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:26 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:As an American, I'd just like to say that I find it humorous that other nations also use "-gate" naming for their political scandals. The hotel break-in heard 'round the world.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Gategate

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby pogrmman » Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:49 am UTC

x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

Somebody else might be willing to work less attractive hours or longer amounts of time — there’s still plenty of supply of workers. Someone needs to do the low-paying, low skill jobs, and just about everyone is qualified for them. Of course the labor itself isn’t going to be valued much in a free-market economy — the high supply of workers means that the wages will stay low.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.
There’s no requirement that the minimum wage covers the cost of living for one person. There’s plenty of places where it doesn’t really do that. As I asked earlier, what’s going to make businesses pay the same for less work?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:20 am UTC

x7eggert wrote:@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.
But if there's a big supply of other people who need the money and are willing to do the work, the (original) workers will just be replaced, and the work will be obtained just as easily. This is why a low unemployment rate tends to raise wages, and a high unemployment rate tends to depress wages.

Sure, you can implement wage controls, and price controls, and market controls, and all sorts of other controls, and you'll end up with a real mess trying to control all these things that are so intricately interrelated, which the free market tends to regulate by itself.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

kdb
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:40 am UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby kdb » Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:58 pm UTC

pogrmman wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

Somebody else might be willing to work less attractive hours or longer amounts of time — there’s still plenty of supply of workers. Someone needs to do the low-paying, low skill jobs, and just about everyone is qualified for them. Of course the labor itself isn’t going to be valued much in a free-market economy — the high supply of workers means that the wages will stay low.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.
There’s no requirement that the minimum wage covers the cost of living for one person. There’s plenty of places where it doesn’t really do that. As I asked earlier, what’s going to make businesses pay the same for less work?


The typical answer would be "laws". But experience in Europe, where such regulation has been traditionally much more prevalent, has shown that businesses always find workarounds, if the laws are too optimistic.

  • Law makes it harder to fire people 50+ or with disabilities? Good for those with the job, but makes finding a new job for those who become unemployed much harder.
  • Law makes firing workers harder? Give them temporary contracts.
  • Law requires temporary contracts to become unlimited after some years of chained temporary contracts? Don't prolong the contract, hire a new worker.
  • Unemployment fund covers workers, who can't make a living from a full-time job? Suddenly you have an increasing number of workers in grossly underpaid jobs, as they now can afford to take them. (Germany, with Hartz IV.)

That's not saying, that the ideas are in principle bad. But if the target of the law and economic reality become too disparate, workarounds will be found that are a net loss for everyone involved. Sadly, disfunctional laws are never being revoked, only "repaired".

speising
Posts: 2281
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby speising » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:58 pm UTC

kdb wrote:Law requires temporary contracts to become unlimited after some years of chained temporary contracts? Don't prolong the contract, hire a new worker.

Reminds me of the law we had here a while ago, that limited rent contracts automatically become unlimited when the renter lives in that apartment for more than a certain number of years (5?) - intended to improve the protection of the renters with chained contracts, but in practice just requiring the renters to move every few years.

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby pogrmman » Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:19 am UTC

kdb wrote:
Spoiler:
pogrmman wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

Somebody else might be willing to work less attractive hours or longer amounts of time — there’s still plenty of supply of workers. Someone needs to do the low-paying, low skill jobs, and just about everyone is qualified for them. Of course the labor itself isn’t going to be valued much in a free-market economy — the high supply of workers means that the wages will stay low.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.
There’s no requirement that the minimum wage covers the cost of living for one person. There’s plenty of places where it doesn’t really do that. As I asked earlier, what’s going to make businesses pay the same for less work?


The typical answer would be "laws". But experience in Europe, where such regulation has been traditionally much more prevalent, has shown that businesses always find workarounds, if the laws are too optimistic.

  • Law makes it harder to fire people 50+ or with disabilities? Good for those with the job, but makes finding a new job for those who become unemployed much harder.
  • Law makes firing workers harder? Give them temporary contracts.
  • Law requires temporary contracts to become unlimited after some years of chained temporary contracts? Don't prolong the contract, hire a new worker.
  • Unemployment fund covers workers, who can't make a living from a full-time job? Suddenly you have an increasing number of workers in grossly underpaid jobs, as they now can afford to take them. (Germany, with Hartz IV.)

That's not saying, that the ideas are in principle bad. But if the target of the law and economic reality become too disparate, workarounds will be found that are a net loss for everyone involved. Sadly, disfunctional laws are never being revoked, only "repaired".

Well, laws can be a solution, but as you point out, buisnesses find ways around laws. It’s really messed up, but I don’t even know how you’d really get started on making a good solution.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4948
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Nov 13, 2018 12:29 am UTC

you take money from people who have too much of it and give it to people who don't have enough, while still leaving enough difference that it's still worth the effort trying to work your way into the first group and out of the last
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

kdb
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:40 am UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby kdb » Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:52 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:you take money from people who have too much of it and give it to people who don't have enough, while still leaving enough difference that it's still worth the effort trying to work your way into the first group and out of the last

Except that those who have REALLY a lot, have ways around this. Such as having their company pay their private expenses and getting only a token income formally. Or formally earning their income through an off-shore company. Or, if all else fails, move the headquarters to a country with more lenient tax laws.

These concepts worked better in a pre-globalized world. Nowadays it would require international cooperation of people in power agreeing on limiting the wealth of people in power. And east-block communism demonstrated nicely, that even in more controlled environments fair distribution isn't achieved – only the criteria change.

You'd think, that there would be some self-interest for the sake of protecting your own wealth to make sure the rest of the population doesn't have too MUCH of a reason to resent your wealth, but historically "Bread & Games" or "Look, that over there is the enemy!" strategies usually worked better than actually solving problems. And, depending on the political system, outright suppression of opposition. Which currently is crawling its way back into western democracies by encouraging mob behavior.

pogrmman wrote:
kdb wrote:
Spoiler:
pogrmman wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

@ucim: If they work less or at more attractive (to them) times, the work cannot be obtained as easily.

Somebody else might be willing to work less attractive hours or longer amounts of time — there’s still plenty of supply of workers. Someone needs to do the low-paying, low skill jobs, and just about everyone is qualified for them. Of course the labor itself isn’t going to be valued much in a free-market economy — the high supply of workers means that the wages will stay low.

The minimum wage for people working 10 hours a day needs to pay one life. Cut that to 8 hours and the minimum wage will rise by 25 %.
There’s no requirement that the minimum wage covers the cost of living for one person. There’s plenty of places where it doesn’t really do that. As I asked earlier, what’s going to make businesses pay the same for less work?


The typical answer would be "laws". But experience in Europe, where such regulation has been traditionally much more prevalent, has shown that businesses always find workarounds, if the laws are too optimistic.

  • Law makes it harder to fire people 50+ or with disabilities? Good for those with the job, but makes finding a new job for those who become unemployed much harder.
  • Law makes firing workers harder? Give them temporary contracts.
  • Law requires temporary contracts to become unlimited after some years of chained temporary contracts? Don't prolong the contract, hire a new worker.
  • Unemployment fund covers workers, who can't make a living from a full-time job? Suddenly you have an increasing number of workers in grossly underpaid jobs, as they now can afford to take them. (Germany, with Hartz IV.)

That's not saying, that the ideas are in principle bad. But if the target of the law and economic reality become too disparate, workarounds will be found that are a net loss for everyone involved. Sadly, disfunctional laws are never being revoked, only "repaired".

Well, laws can be a solution, but as you point out, buisnesses find ways around laws. It’s really messed up, but I don’t even know how you’d really get started on making a good solution.


If it were easy, we'd already have it :)

x7eggert
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 6:55 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby x7eggert » Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:50 pm UTC

pogrmman wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

The lack of people doing the prescribed amount of work for for less money, since nobody can live from less.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4948
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:27 pm UTC

If the minimum wage were actually the minimum it is possible for someone to survive on at all, that might be true, but it's (rightly) not. People can go on living, just in worse and more miserable conditions, on less money than they're already being paid, and if you just mandate that they work less time, but not that they be paid more per time, that's what they'll have to do, because they don't have the leverage to insist that they be paid more just so that they are less miserable. That can continue down to the point that you actually can't pay people less without (too many of) them straight up dying (because just some dying still won't stop it so long as there are still others to take their place), at which point what you're saying kicks in, but ideally we'd like to keep further away from that point.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby pogrmman » Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:32 am UTC

x7eggert wrote:
pogrmman wrote:
x7eggert wrote:They will work less for the same amount of money. Or they will work at more attractive times if it's work that does not go away by postponing it, and more people will find a job.

What’s to say they will work less for the same amount of money? There’s lots and lots of hourly workers — what incentive is there for a business to pay their employees the same for less work?

The lack of people doing the prescribed amount of work for for less money, since nobody can live from less.

Even if you take into account that the minimum wage already doesn’t cover cost of living in many places, there’s plenty of people who work part-time for whatever reason. There’s people who will work for a job that pays less than the cost of living because they already have another job but still need an additional one to make ends meet.

Also, what do you consider “nobody can live for less”? What quality of life is that? People are resourceful — generally speaking, I’d guess that people could stay alive with less than minimum wage, but in what conditions? What should we (as a society) accept as a minimum standard of living? How can we assure that everyone gets that? Minimum wage laws? Strong safety nets? How do we ensure this in remote areas? What about different costs of living in different areas? What about groups that have historically been disenfranchised? Buisnesses generally have no interest in these things — most people would rather have a job and make some money than have no job and make no money. Even if the wage isn’t enough to provide a good standard of living, there’ll be some takers.

Hafting
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 11:23 am UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Hafting » Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:26 am UTC

DavidSh wrote:If you can prove to people how you voted, you can more easily sell your vote.


Which could be a problem with those mail-in votes. But a ballot selfie?

Where I vote, there are voting booths for anonymity. Inside each, a rack with stacks of paper ballots - different ones for each party. I grab one, put it in an envelope. Then I go outside and put my now secret ballot in the big box.

A selfie in the voting booth could not prove how I vote. I could take the selfie with one ballot, put it back in the rack, then put some other ballot in the envelope. Still, I'd waste time and the queue would get longer. So "no selfies" makes sense for that reason.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3659
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:53 pm UTC

In UK voting, you are given a ballot to take to the booth (no 'blanks' in the booth) and you'd probably, because I've never had to do it, have to go back to the desk and ask for a new form. Any significant vote-buying followed by this logical counter would probably see an uptick in 'redo requests' that indicates an issue.


* Awaiting someone "ballet unstuffing" by visitors taking handfuls away at a time, in their pockets, and overwhelming the ability for the polling station to supply enough for the expected visitors. Or how does this system not avoid a voter filling in two (or more) forms, palming both into the box? I think I misunderstand this particular setup.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2991
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby orthogon » Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:08 pm UTC

Yes, you only get given one ballot paper. I believe the number on the ballot is recorded against your entry on the register. In case somebody impersonates you, they can fish out the impostor's ballot at the count and replace with yours, but they never need to do that unless the margin is tight. Perhaps if you make a mistake you can use the same mechanism, or perhaps you can return your ballot for destruction. Or maybe it's just tough. Or perhaps that's why we use pencils - you just rub it out and correct it?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:56 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:In case somebody impersonates you, they can fish out the impostor's ballot at the count
...which implies that they can also fish out your legitimate ballot and see how you, personally, voted.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2991
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby orthogon » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:46 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
orthogon wrote:In case somebody impersonates you, they can fish out the impostor's ballot at the count
...which implies that they can also fish out your legitimate ballot and see how you, personally, voted.

Jose

Indeed; I believe this is the case. However, they could destroy the record in the polling station when the polls close and before the ballot box is unsealed. By then they know which ballots, if any, might need attention.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:36 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:However, they could destroy the record...
...or, a suitably amoral administration might choose to preserve the records, and avail themselves of the resulting voter profiles in the next campaign.

I prefer that it be impossible to do this, as opposed to it being an integral part of the voting process.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3455
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:52 am UTC

ucim wrote:
orthogon wrote:However, they could destroy the record...
...or, a suitably amoral administration might choose to preserve the records, and avail themselves of the resulting voter profiles in the next campaign.

I prefer that it be impossible to do this, as opposed to it being an integral part of the voting process.

Jose

A suitably amoral administration, acting in collusion with their opposition and any third-parties that send observers to the polling stations and/or count.

One of the principles here in the UK is that anyone can exercise oversight over the process (or individual parts of the process, at any rate)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby ucim » Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:32 am UTC

rmsgrey wrote:A suitably amoral administration, acting in collusion
Perhaps on election night, but what about afterwards? If the records still exist, then they can be opened. An argument could be made that it's important to preserve the records because {reasons}, without any reference to side effects. Once that's in place, it's open.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3455
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:37 am UTC

ucim wrote:
rmsgrey wrote:A suitably amoral administration, acting in collusion
Perhaps on election night, but what about afterwards? If the records still exist, then they can be opened. An argument could be made that it's important to preserve the records because {reasons}, without any reference to side effects. Once that's in place, it's open.

Jose

I don't know what happens to the records after election night. I assume that either they're destroyed, or they remain sealed and the seals can be inspected.

The goal is not just to maintain the integrity of the ballot, but also the appearance of integrity - and it's not exactly hard to devise a robust system when people are allowed to watch to make sure there's no cheating going on, and the details of the system are open source.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3659
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2066: "Ballot Selfies"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:07 pm UTC

I had a very interesting read of a number of interesting documents, including this one.

Very near the end, there's this:
There is a safeguard to prevent the ballot paper numbers on the corresponding number list being linked with the marked ballot papers. At the close of poll, the corresponding number list is placed in a sealed envelope by the Presiding Officer at the polling station. The sealed envelope is then taken to the Local Returning Officer. After the count has taken place, the used ballot papers are also sealed. The only occasion when the sealed packets can be opened is on the order of a judge as a result of an election petition or in furtherance of an investigation into an alleged election offence. Even then, it is very rare for the documents to be examined except in cases where fraud or personation (i.e. someone voting illegally on someone else’s behalf) are being investigated.


You would need to have both the numbered voting papers and the voting-roll with the names to link a name to a vote. Safeguards (stated elsewhere) keep this record from being available during the day, and then deliberate efforts would be required to dearchive both sets of materials and painstakingly trawl through them for a match of interest (i.e. resolving a personation case).

The modern-day danger is perhaps a hidden camera or surreptitiously-used hand-scanner does one and/or the other half of the job as the vote/count progresses (to be mined for the exact match(es) required later). Anybody with enough access to fiddle with the material while 'sealed' doubtless already has the resources and cooperation required to falsify the end counts to their advantage. (Just like why would you have your touchscreen voting machines display a YourParty touch as visibly a TheirParty vote, when you could likely as easily accept a YourParty vote, show a YourParty vote but record a TheirParty increment to the tallies. Or nothing at all, despite all outward designs. ETA: Whilst, or alternately, directly corrollating your intended vote with what you were asked to vote for, naturally. Not only do you get snitched on, for consciously reneging, but also you end up doing as they want anyway!)


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: lmjb1964, mscha, Quizatzhaderac, The_Alchemist, Yahoo [Bot] and 36 guests