Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Recount?

  • 09-06-2009 9:56am
    #1
    Elmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭


    Should their be a nationwide recount after the huge mistakes with the North West Euro Constituency?

    While it back fired for Declan Ganley, my point would be how far out are the election results across the country when those were so far out.


Comments

  • #2
    DB10
    Site Banned Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭DB10


    When you also see people losing by 1 vote, questions really have to be asked if 3000 can go the wrong way.


  • #3
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Elmo wrote: »
    While it back fired for Declan Ganley, my point would be how far out are the election results across the country when those were so far out.

    Might explain how FF managed to get 24%......

    The real question is how the surplus is distributed, and whether a new surplus sample is taken for the recount (discussed elsewhere).

    If it's a new surplus sample, that might explain a significant difference, and it probably has to be accepted as part of the PR system.

    If it's the same surplus sample, and the same procedure, then there are questions to be asked alright.


  • #4
    Dero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 740 ✭✭✭Dero


    It just exacerbates my frustration at the almighty bollox-up they made of electronic voting. :(

    No politician is going to dare go near it again here for years. Done properly though, it could eliminate all this recount/surplus distribution uncertainty. Ah well.


  • #5
    Elmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Dero wrote: »
    It just exacerbates my frustration at the almighty bollox-up they made of electronic voting. :(

    No politician is going to dare go near it again here for years. Done properly though, it could eliminate all this recount/surplus distribution uncertainty. Ah well.

    Only if electronic counting is done correctly. I think there needs to be a paper trail, with one count from one centre to insure the electronic vote is correct.


  • #6
    Dero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 740 ✭✭✭Dero


    Elmo wrote: »
    Only if electronic counting is done correctly.

    Exactly, which is why I explicitly said done properly. Not to turn this to an e-voting thread, but a paper trail is only one aspect of making it a trustworthy system. I would forego the paper trail if I could trust the system itself. Closed-source black box implementations are a no-no to me at least. I would want open-source all the way, from the system specs. to the software used. But then I spend all day every day immersed in computer technology so maybe my opinions are too far removed from most. I remember reading a long time ago about some such system from Australia, but it's only a vague recollection.

    Apologies for the off-topic meanderings.

    Edit: Found it. Haven't actually checked how it worked out yet. The article is from 2003.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement