Does Anyone Find This 19th Century Style Count a Tad Embarrassing?

Laois_Man · 26-02-2011 11:32pm #1

I like the drama of the drawn out manual count. But looking at news of this count flash up on CNN earlier this evening, I did cringe a bit. Every other developed country can call a definite result within hours of the polls closing and we'll probably have some re-counts still going on next Monday.

I know the first past the post system that most country's have is a lot easier to count. But what ever was so complicated about getting those e-voting machines to work properly?

Dirk Gently · 26-02-2011 11:33pm

nah, the count is the best part of the election process.

loldog · 26-02-2011 11:34pm

No. It's brilliant entertainment and I'm very proud of our electoral system.

.

Raging_Ninja · 26-02-2011 11:34pm

In the US some counts go on for days, and occasionally they have to go to the courts. There's nothing wrong with having counts go on for a few days.

I think it adds to it - the monumental task of electing a new government, counting each physical ballot one at a time. Doing things electronically makes it cold and bureaucratic. With the pen and paper, you feel like you've achieved something.

im invisible · 26-02-2011 11:38pm

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

..you feel like you've achieved something.

when, in reality.....

mikemac · 26-02-2011 11:39pm

Reminds me of 2007

I had to go down to Co Meath the other day and apologise to the people of Meath for being a modern technologically-advanced country and one of the biggest exporters of software, that we’re going back to the pencils”.

“If this House did not want to play politics with the issue, we would not be the laughing stock of Europe by carrying out a vote for two million people by using pencils. A ridiculous situation.”

Bertie Ahern TD

The current system is fine and today is the best part of it. It's great entertainment and people can get more involved then an officer reading some printout from a machine
If you can wait five years for an election you can wait one day for the results

yoshytoshy · 26-02-2011 11:40pm

I thought we were computerised with this stuff already ,smart economy and all that.

AndyP · 26-02-2011 11:41pm

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

In the US some counts go on for days, and occasionally they have to go to the courts. There's nothing wrong with having counts go on for a few days.

And look at the administration the Americans got a few years ago because they CAN'T count votes properly.
Nothing wrong with the system in my view.

swampgas · 26-02-2011 11:48pm

yoshytoshy wrote: »

I thought we were computerised with this stuff already ,smart economy and all that.

The more a person knows about computers, the less they like electronic voting.

The great thing about the current system is that it is open and transparent, you can actually see the counting take place. I'd prefer that over electronic voting any day.

There are many things computers are great for, reliable anonymous voting isn't one of them.

Ref: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wit.html

M cebee · 26-02-2011 11:49pm

seems's silly alright counting votes

and the tallying and election drama seems out of place because of all the serious problems we have

we'll have to dust down those machines

Wolfe Tone · 26-02-2011 11:50pm

No its great!!!

amdublin · 26-02-2011 11:50pm

Nope. I love it.

yoshytoshy · 26-02-2011 11:53pm

swampgas wrote: »

The more a person knows about computers, the less they like electronic voting.

The great thing about the current system is that it is open and transparent, you can actually see the counting take place. I'd prefer that over electronic voting any day.

There are many things computers are great for, reliable anonymous voting isn't one of them.

Ref: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wit.html

I never thought about it that way ,just presumed that electronic counting is the way things progress.

dashboard_hula · 26-02-2011 11:55pm

No, it's good, and I hope the current system is kept for a long time yet. I spent a few hours at my aunts today, and she had the election running on both TV's and the PC. The 3 teenagers in the house were glued to the telly everytime a returning officer came on to announce a result, and actual conversations were had about what each candidate/party stands for and what the consequences would be. T'was great, I don't think there'd be that level of engagement with e-voting.

Lapin · 26-02-2011 11:57pm

What happens to all the ballot papers after the count ?

Are they stored away somewhere or destroyed ?

blubloblu · 26-02-2011 11:58pm

swampgas wrote: »

The more a person knows about computers, the less they like electronic voting.

The great thing about the current system is that it is open and transparent, you can actually see the counting take place. I'd prefer that over electronic voting any day.

There are many things computers are great for, reliable anonymous voting isn't one of them.

Ref: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2004/11/the_problem_wit.html

Have you seen this? http://blog.ted.com/2010/11/02/e-voting-without-fraud-david-bismark-on-ted-com/

Eliot Rosewater · 26-02-2011 11:58pm

Laois_Man wrote: »

Every other developed country can call a definite result within hours of the polls closing and we'll probably have some re-counts still going on next Monday.

You'd like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/8666278.stm

MagicMarker · 26-02-2011 11:59pm

loldog wrote: »

No. It's brilliant entertainment and I'm very proud of our electoral system.

.

Easily satisfied eh?

Laois_Man · 27-02-2011 12:04am

AndyP wrote: »

And look at the administration the Americans got a few years ago because they CAN'T count votes properly.
Nothing wrong with the system in my view.

I dont understand this comparison. In 2000, Florida was not using computerised voting. They were counting holes manually punched thru paper and spent weeks arguing over those that weren't punched thru 100% completely or were a tiny bit against the line. Plus the fact that Florida which just happened to have George Bush's brother as their governor made up rules on the day about who was allowed to vote and who wasn't. Plus the fact that Bush's eventual fate was decided by Daddy's old friends in the US Supreme Court. Nothing whatsoever to do with e-voting!

colly10 · 27-02-2011 12:06am

Laois_Man wrote: »

I like the drama of the drawn out manual count. But looking at news of this count flash up on CNN earlier this evening, I did cringe a bit. Every other developed country can call a definite result within hours of the polls closing and we'll probably have some re-counts still going on next Monday.

I know the first past the post system that most country's have is a lot easier to count. But what ever was so complicated about getting those e-voting machines to work properly?

There's constant talk of election fixing in the states, the system works, I couldn't care what the rest of the world think

ShooterSF · 27-02-2011 12:07am

It is entertaining but give me a list system any day.

Laois_Man · 27-02-2011 12:13am

I find it interesting that people will trust computers to do their banking and keep their records straight but won't trust them to anonymously and correctly count votes.

the_syco · 27-02-2011 12:20am

Laois_Man wrote: »

I find it interesting that people will trust computers to do their banking and keep their records straight but won't trust them to anonymously and correctly count votes.

A lot more can be gained by rigging the vote.

InTheTrees · 27-02-2011 12:20am

Last night I was shocked that everyone went home after the polls closed and only started counting this morning.

Now that I'm watching the counting I can see why they wanted a rest last night.

But I think its been a great day of watching democracy in action and there's a whole weekend to go. Whats the hurry?

colly10 · 27-02-2011 12:26am

Laois_Man wrote: »

I find it interesting that people will trust computers to do their banking and keep their records straight but won't trust them to anonymously and correctly count votes.

Because it's anonymous and I can't verify what happened, i've worked with computers most of my life and seen the quality of software that goes into production, I wouldn't trust it

Downlinz · 27-02-2011 12:30am

It isn't about entertainment or getting people involved. It's about an accurate and fair system. You do wonder what the margin of error is when it comes to human counts and how many ballots are unintentionally spoiled.

Would probably be cost effective to not have to rent dozens of halls and hotel rooms up and down the country to host counts either.

thebman · 27-02-2011 12:38am

Laois_Man wrote: »

I dont understand this comparison. In 2000, Florida was not using computerised voting. They were counting holes manually punched thru paper and spent weeks arguing over those that weren't punched thru 100% completely or were a tiny bit against the line. Plus the fact that Florida which just happened to have George Bush's brother as their governor made up rules on the day about who was allowed to vote and who wasn't. Plus the fact that Bush's eventual fate was decided by Daddy's old friends in the US Supreme Court. Nothing whatsoever to do with e-voting!

you really should look up their e-voting systems they have trialled more.

Programmers have sworn under oath that they were told to put back doors in whether lying or not, it is always a possiblity and why e-voting can't work properly IMO.

Laois_Man · 27-02-2011 12:43am

colly10 wrote: »

Because it's anonymous and I can't verify what happened, i've worked with computers most of my life and seen the quality of software that goes into production, I wouldn't trust it

There's nothing wrong with production software that's PROPERLY validated and exhaustively tested and secured.

thebman · 27-02-2011 12:46am

Laois_Man wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with production software that's PROPERLY validated and exhaustively tested and secured.

There is if the validation company is also bought off!!

eagle eye · 27-02-2011 12:48am

I love the count I have to say and like said above computer programs are open to manipulation which is a concern. And anyways the country is broke, we can't very well go off spending money on something that hopefully will only be in use once or twice every five years imo.

Rabble Rabble · 27-02-2011 12:52am

There is no way to verify the software.

1) The guy writing the software could have added a bug, or been corrupt.
2) The verifiers could be corrupt.
3) Showing someone source code means nothing. It may not be on the actual machine.
4) When people talk about OCR and keeping the votes as verification then they admit that system is flawed.

the electronic system cannot compete in terms of transparency with tallymen.

And whats the bloody rush. The Dail does not meet for a week, or two.

Does Anyone Find This 19th Century Style Count a Tad Embarrassing?

Comments