Public voting?

[tsunamy]

I'd like to get everyone's idea about public voting. I'm aware we currently do it as a means of security, but I seriously think we need to revisit this topic.

 

In the past election, I was approached by two different individuals regarding my vote. One was a friend and one was a campaign message.

 

Now, I don't mind friendly suggestions/requests/etc. However, I have a major problem with individuals who voted for one candidate are being targeted by another. Frankly, I don't think it's appropriate.

 

And yes -- I get that we can vote via the "vote collector" which I often do, but I am one of ... two?

 

In any case, this leads to my second point, in that I think public voting is really contributing to the "us vs. them" mentality of the region. You know exactly which members voted for you and which members didn't -- this wouldn't happen if everyone voted by secret ballot.

 

What are others' thoughts here?

[Escade]

I think voters feeling uncomfortable is not something we want.  I was a little surprised when I first saw public voting and I don't know the history of the practice in TSP.

 

I wonder if the poll feature could be used for votes?  There is an option where voters are private to everyone but whoever conducted the vote and admins.

[Letoilenoir]

The Secret Ballot is fundamental to ensuring democratic process

[Cormac]

Some people, such as myself, prefer to vote publicly. I'm fine with having a private option for those who want it -- which we already do -- but I don't want to be forced to vote privately, and the reason for that is that the reality of the forum system is that public voting is the only form of voting that isn't subject to possible administrative manipulation. I'm not saying I think any TSP admins would manipulate voting, but I do know it's possible and the possibility makes me much more comfortable personally with public voting.

 

I would be opposed to anything that would remove a public voting option.

[Hileville]

I'm with Cormac. The polling system is inadequate for multiple reasons which have been explained several times already. I would actually prefer if we only allowed public voting. Having private votes in close races like the MoFA race brings an undesirable burden to the EC. I know of several people who believed the vote would be manipulated and said as much on IRC and through other avenues.

[QuietDad]

It's a fine line,.  I can see people wanting to vote privately, but being an internet game, I know personally I would like to know who the voters are and that the total number of voters equals the the total number of votes cast. I have an issue with "We're having a vote and we will let you know what the vote that only we can see is".

[Escade]

If it's possible to vote privately and the majority vote publicly (due to transparency) then the system works.

 

So, perhaps campaigning is the issue?

[QuietDad]

Can't stop the campaigning really. Can't stop TGs, PMs and such. Even though I've been guilty of it in the past,figuring out a way where you can't change a vote once it's cast would quiet things down. I think most of the issues come from someone posting a vote and getting bombarded with "Please change your vote to...." more than campaigns of "When you go vote, please vote for..."

[Sandaoguo]

I've been thinking of writing a system that keeps the benefits of public voting while allowing people to make their votes anonymous. It would also protect against the possibility of somebody altering private votes. I'll post more when I get home.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk

[Sandaoguo]

Okay, so this is a basic outline of the system I imagine.

 

1. People register to vote
2. Election commissioner manually gives each registered voter an activation code
3. Voter goes to website and enters activation code
4. Website verifies code and then verifies voter identity through NSAPI
5. Website prompts user for a secure identification string
6. String is hashed and put into a central database
7. When voter casts a ballot, they input their string
8. Website verifies that the string exists
9. Vote is publicly displayed in real time (or at the end) with the string attached, which allows voters to verify their vote was counted
10. Voters can optionally include their name with their vote

[Hileville]

I would prefer we keep things simple.

[Unibot]

I think the people who participated in the election (public and private) should be revealed afterwards. But how people voted privately shouldn't be. That way, if there was a flood of 1 post puppets voting in this election, people could call it into question in retrospect - and perhaps see the need for tougher citizenship requirements if need be.

 

 

I also don't see lobbying as wrong - I think it should be encouraged. It's a democracy after all.

[Hileville]

I think the people who participated in the election (public and private) should be revealed afterwards. But how people voted privately shouldn't be. That way, if there was a flood of 1 post puppets voting in this election, people could call it into question in retrospect - and perhaps see the need for tougher citizenship requirements if need be.

The problem with revealing who the private voters is the fact only one person used it last election. You would instantly know who they voted for. I still believe the best course of action is all public votes.

[Cormac]

I support all-public voting as well, particularly if private voting is being so rarely used. I recognize how people feel about the need for secret ballot in a democracy, but there are times when ideological considerations like that have to be put aside for the realities of this game and its mechanics. The reality is that private voting can be (relatively easily) manipulated in this game; whether that would ever happen here or not, it's important for both our own citizens and other regions to know with absolute certainty they can trust the integrity of our elections.

[Unibot]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Unibot" data-cid="113891" data-time="1389661736">
I think the people who participated in the election (public and private) should be revealed afterwards. But how people voted privately shouldn't be. That way, if there was a flood of 1 post puppets voting in this election, people could call it into question in retrospect - and perhaps see the need for tougher citizenship requirements if need be.

The problem with revealing who the private voters is the fact only one person used it last election. You would instantly know who they voted for. I still believe the best course of action is all public votes.
 


</blockquote>
 

That's true, I've made this suggestion before in TNP. But in TNP, it was a regular practice to vote private. Usually half the votes were private there. If its not being used then I don't think there's a huge need for it.

[Awesomiasa]

I agree that votes can be manipulated, but looking at the TNP method, private voters have their names redacted and only their votes are shown. Though I have to concur with many other opinions here that all public voting can be a fairer alternative

[Sandaoguo]

I would prefer we keep things simple.

 

Well, it is simple. You register to vote. You get a code. You go to a website, create a "signature." That's all done just once, and can easily be part of the citizenship registration process. Every time you actually vote, you sign with your "signature." That's not exactly brain surgery. It's actually the exact same process you use to register for a forum that requires email validation.

 

The problem is that private voting isn't secure, which may lead people to vote publicly to ensure their vote isn't changed or miscounted. But not everybody wants to vote publicly, because that can have negative consequences if somebody thinks you voted for the wrong person. (There's also the strong and convincing point that the secret ballot is a fundamental principle of democracy.) The only way to reconcile these two is to have a private voting option where it isn't possible for the person running the election to alter the votes. You can't do that with the current forum-based options (polls & private messages). I'm offering to help create that kind of system.

[QuietDad]

I have no problem with any system where the votes are private. I do see issues in the current system where we only have someone's word that one person voted privately. Not saying ANYTHING, but whats to say that no one voted and the "private vote" was made up to prevent a runoff or to make sure GR won? If the public vote had Hem ahead by 6 votes, would there have been 7 "private votes" for Sandaoguo? I fully trust the vote is legit and there is no shenanigans in play YET. Would just like it more secure. As for Sandaogu's proposel, while it may seem easy, it makes it annoying for whoever has to administer that. I'll take a look at my code libraries to see if I have the ipboard voting feature added/on/available and see if I can make a poll that Takes one vote, keeps it private and allows properly tagged users to vote once. should be easier.


 

[Escade]

So just to be clear, GR won the election and none of the votes were "doctored."  

 

I understand concerns about private voting as well.  Perhaps voters can submit to the public thread and declare, "Private Vote."  That way everyone is aware of who voted but if a person chooses their vote can be private. 

[Awesomiasa]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hileville" data-cid="113890" data-time="1389661692">
<div>
I would prefer we keep things simple.

 

Well, it is simple. You register to vote. You get a code. You go to a website, create a "signature." That's all done just once, and can easily be part of the citizenship registration process. Every time you actually vote, you sign with your "signature." That's not exactly brain surgery. It's actually the exact same process you use to register for a forum that requires email validation.

 

The problem is that private voting isn't secure, which may lead people to vote publicly to ensure their vote isn't changed or miscounted. But not everybody wants to vote publicly, because that can have negative consequences if somebody thinks you voted for the wrong person. (There's also the strong and convincing point that the secret ballot is a fundamental principle of democracy.) The only way to reconcile these two is to have a private voting option where it isn't possible for the person running the election to alter the votes. You can't do that with the current forum-based options (polls & private messages). I'm offering to help create that kind of system.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
If I'm getting this right, is it like private-key cryptography?

[Geomania]

I understand the rationale for public ballots, but I would much prefer a system that keeps votes private.

 

How about this? Keep voting private (using Google Drive to collect the ballots instead of the poll function on the forum) but have multiple election commissioners entrusted with counting ballots and certifying the results to ensure against voter fraud on the part of the ECs. We used to have three ECs back in the day, so why not go with that? The only impediment to that might be it would be difficult to get three people willing to be commissioners, but we somehow managed then and we probably could now.

[Arbiter08]

Why Don't we use the topic poll feature on a citizen only access thread? But make it so that you CAN'T see others answers.That is a public vote where your vote is kept secret, and we can still see how a candidate is doing.

[Rebel-topia]

The problem with the poll option is, if someone wanted to sit and watch who entered the voting poll thread, they could 100% know who voted for who.

[Arbiter08]

Not exactly, if there is more then one person on the thred and they both vote at the same time (for different people) then there would be no way of knowing who voted for who. Also, is there some way an admin could disable that feature on a specific thread?

[Rebel-topia]

That would require 2 people voting at the same time, and for different candidates. If 2 people both vote for the same person, then its still easy to know who voted for who... 

 

And, that Im aware of (and Im not very good at being aware of this kinda stuff), that is not an option. Hile would have a better idea of that...