Where's me pencil? or the sickest joke of them all.

Oak3

Right, what I want to know is how many people just cast their vote with a pencil?

Considering the level of corruption and the absolute quixotic condition of our beloved country since the early eighties does it not stand to reason that there is something deeply sick and disturbing about being offered a pencil to cast your vote? And worse, taking it and voting away?

When was the last time you signed any document or contract whatsoever with a pencil? How many of our economists, academics, politicians, public servants and business people just did that very thing?

Replies in digital ink, cheers.

Alter-Ego

They're cheaper to store than those feckin' E-Voting machines.

karlog

In case you need to change your mind?

BluesBerry

Where I voted the only writing implement was a black colouring pencil the chunky kind hahaha

bonerm

The pencil is mightier than the sordid.

dr.bollocko

Moved from after hours.

Dinner

If i were attempting to rig an election the thing I would definitely do is painstakingly rub out hundreds or thousands of numbers and change them to suit me. Because that's by far the most efficient way of rigging an election. It's just so quick to take a sealed ballot box off to a quiet room, open it, tamper hundreds of votes, seal it again and deliver it back before any one noticing.

It would be a flawless plan. no one would ever notice the marks that are inevitably left on the paper after rubbing out pencil writing. An entire box of these marks wouldn't be suspicious at all.

That was sarcasm, by the way... :pac:

thetonynator

Imagine how many hours it would take just to change a few hundred votes . . :rolleyes:

Queen-Mise

That was why your man was trying to set the ballot box on fire - to try to hide the evidence of vote tampering.

Oak3

Nah, the thinking is not that it would be possible to change an enormous amount of votes (although changing one might be sufficient and thereby enough to invalidate the entire vote) but rather that it's a gross insult to be expected to cast a vote with said pencil, considering it wouldn't really be acceptable in any other type of document.

takun

You can vote with a writing implement of your choice. If you want to bring a quill and inkpot it would be perfectly fine.

In case you didn't bring anything they provide a pencil - cheaper, more easily maintained and more reliable than pens.

"deeply sick and disturbing" and "gross insult" strikes me as just a wee bit OTT on such a trivial matter, no?

Rabble Rabble

Oak3 wrote: »

Nah, the thinking is not that it would be possible to change an enormous amount of votes (although changing one might be sufficient and thereby enough to invalidate the entire vote) but rather that it's a gross insult to be expected to cast a vote with said pencil, considering it wouldn't really be acceptable in any other type of document.

The idea is that you can change your mind, or correct a mistake, while being ballotted.

Have we jumped the shark with the "corrupt little country" bollocks at this stage.

Rabble Rabble

However, OP is a good example of why electronic voting cant work. The conspiracy theorists would have a field day.

Oak3

takun wrote: »

You can vote with a writing implement of your choice. If you want to bring a quill and inkpot it would be perfectly fine.

In case you didn't bring anything they provide a pencil - cheaper, more easily maintained and more reliable than pens.

"deeply sick and disturbing" and "gross insult" strikes me as just a wee bit OTT on such a trivial matter, no?

Yep, point taken, but we don't know that they're cheaper and we don't know that they're more reliable. I doesn't seem to me to be a trivial matter at all, certainly less than trivial. Fraud is not a trivial matter if as much one single vote cast with a pencil can be easily changed without being noticed.

Iwannahurl

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

However, OP is a good example of why electronic voting cant work. The conspiracy theorists would have a field day.

What do you mean by "conspiracy theorists"?

It's clear that this vote was rigged. FG and Labour conspired to erase and re-write huge numbers of pencilled-in votes in the time between the sealing of the ballot boxes and opening of the boxes in the count centres.

Fact. If you insist on evidence, look for the used rubbers. I mean erasers. Remember, they laughed at Ballpoint when he invented the pen.




.

HerrScheisse

You cannot beat the humble pencil. Think back to the problems the US had developing pens that could write in space. The ink was all foed up because of the lack of gravity and they spent multiple millions and many years developing magic "space pens". Sure they got there eventually and they worked much like electronic voting would, but the Soviets just used a pencil

Alun

HerrScheisse wrote: »

You cannot beat the humble pencil. Think back to the problems the US had developing pens that could write in space. The ink was all foed up because of the lack of gravity and they spent multiple millions and many years developing magic "space pens". Sure they got there eventually and they worked much like electronic voting would, but the Soviets just used a pencil

Like all 'good stories' this one is not quite true ... The only person who spent millions was a guy who wanted to sell it to NASA, and there were real problems with pencils (see article) that meant they were not ideal for use on board a spaceship.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

Oak3

All i know is this, that every cell in my body is sounding alarm bells about the prospect of voting with a pencil, not that I did ever consider voting in the latest puppet show anyway. I was just wondering how other people felt about it. Maybe "gross insult" and "!deeply sick and disturbing" are OTT phrases. Maybe.

Uncle Ben

The issue of pencils are really of no concern to me at all. What disturbs me most in my locality, is the person that canvasses at every election for one such political party, is the very same person that issues the ballot papers and cross-checks the electoral register. Now I am not suggesting anything but there are plenty of minutes in a 15 hour day when the recently deceased, emigrated etc. could cast their vote!! I understand this would be quite difficult in a large city or town but in this small area the opportunity 'could' arise.

Raging_Ninja

Uncle Ben wrote: »

The issue of pencils are really of no concern to me at all. What disturbs me most in my locality, is the person that canvasses at every election for one such political party, is the very same person that issues the ballot papers and cross-checks the electoral register. Now I am not suggesting anything but there are plenty of minutes in a 15 hour day when the recently deceased, emigrated etc. could cast their vote!! I understand this would be quite difficult in a large city or town but in this small area the opportunity 'could' arise.

Presiding officers and poll clerks are forbidden from canvassing/electioneering. You should inform the county registrar's office.

Uncle Ben

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Presiding officers and poll clerks are forbidden from canvassing. You should inform the county registrar's office.

Thanks for that, the big joke around here is the fact that a certain party's votes are always first through the ballot box. I'll make the call.

jmayo

Dinner wrote: »

If i were attempting to rig an election the thing I would definitely do is painstakingly rub out hundreds or thousands of numbers and change them to suit me. Because that's by far the most efficient way of rigging an election. It's just so quick to take a sealed ballot box off to a quiet room, open it, tamper hundreds of votes, seal it again and deliver it back before any one noticing.

It would be a flawless plan. no one would ever notice the marks that are inevitably left on the paper after rubbing out pencil writing. An entire box of these marks wouldn't be suspicious at all.

That was sarcasm, by the way... :pac:

Even better you could computerise the system and have absolutely no audit trail to prove how you arrived at the result.

Added to that the devices would have to be stored somewhere, probably with a party supporter who would claim a handsome annual fee from the taxpayer.
It is win win for whoever dreams it up.

Alun wrote: »

Like all 'good stories' this one is not quite true ... The only person who spent millions was a guy who wanted to sell it to NASA, and there were real problems with pencils (see article) that meant they were not ideal for use on board a spaceship.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

I just love it when these myths are debunked.

AFAIK they didn't want to use pencils because the ends could break off and float into things, bit like Homer in space with his crisps.
Was that in the article ?

Although the Russians were more savvy with certain things like tank design.

Baralis1

If we had the e-voting machines that people completely derided and didn't give a chance to, all this counting of votes etc could have been over in a few minutes with no mistakes. And it is completely possible to validate and have controlled computer systems where there is no doubt of mistake or tampering. If a billion or so people in India can conduct their election using e-voting machines, why can't we.

thetonynator

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What do you mean by "conspiracy theorists"?

It's clear that this vote was rigged. FG and Labour conspired to erase and re-write huge numbers of pencilled-in votes in the time between the sealing of the ballot boxes and opening of the boxes in the count centres.

Fact. If you insist on evidence, look for the used rubbers. I mean erasers. Remember, they laughed at Ballpoint when he invented the pen.

I'm pretty sure his name was biro . . . :P

Rabble Rabble

Baralis1 wrote: »

If we had the e-voting machines that people completely derided and didn't give a chance to, all this counting of votes etc could have been over in a few minutes with no mistakes. And it is completely possible to validate and have controlled computer systems where there is no doubt of mistake or tampering. If a billion or so people in India can conduct their election using e-voting machines, why can't we.

If people have conspiracy theories about pencils, a vote called 5 minutes after the election giving FF more votes than expected would start a large scale riot.

Anyway,the count is fun.

Baralis1

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

If people have conspiracy theories about pencils, a vote called 5 minutes after the election giving FF more votes than expected would start a large scale riot.

Anyway,the count is fun.

I suppose it's like Mrs Doyle's thoughts on making tea.
Sure we love the misery of trawling through thousands and thousands of votes, counting, recounting, tallying, predicting, re-predicting, guessing, discussing and dragging it out for three days.

People always blamed FF or accused FF of anything they possibly could just because they were the biggest party and in government so long. Lets see how FG /Lab cope with it now for a while.

sceptre

As usual, I voted with a black pen which was conveniently in my pocket. Handy for giving one of the outgoing TDs a worse preference than the crazy trio who want a Christian state; to bring back hanging and send the foreigners home; and the one who's barred from taking any more cases to the High Court for being an annoying nuisance.

Blood might have been better but I thought that was OTT.

Oak3

sceptre wrote: »

As usual, I voted with a black pen which was conveniently in my pocket. Handy for giving one of the outgoing TDs a worse preference than the crazy trio who want a Christian state; to bring back hanging and send the foreigners home; and the one who's barred from taking any more cases to the High Court for being an annoying nuisance.

Blood might have been better but I thought that was OTT.

Aha! a decent response at last, thanks for that, go on, who's the one with the Isaac Wunder order against him/her?

Killer Pigeon

I saw this slideshow on RTÉ of people sealing some election boxes will red candle wax - I mean it's like we're back in the early 19th century, literally.

Raging_Ninja

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

I saw this slideshow on RTÉ of people sealing some election boxes will red candle wax - I mean it's like we're back in the early 19th century, literally.

Low-tech never fails. Its the quickest, simplest and cheapest way of proving that the box has not been opened.