• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    While Ranked Pairs sound good in theory, how would you actually sell this method to normal people? Transparency is one of the basic requirements for the acceptability of a vote, and this method will be beyond maybe 70-80% of the American public, if not more.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well, a lot of them don’t really understand the current system either.

        What is important is how are you, as a voter, gonna vote for the person you want to win. In the end, it’s either choose one or rank them from top to bottom.

        What could be the problem is tallying several million individual votes, let alone putting them into a computer. I wonder what the algorithmic complexity is for this system.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Having a FOSS voting system would enable electronic voting without the baggage. Decentralize the means to certify votes. End to end encryption and anonymization always. If there are groups of people who disagree with the vote, they get separated from the main group and given land and territory of their own. That’s how I’d do it.

          • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If its anonymous how do you keep malware from voting for people. Do you also intend to first solve computer security THEN solve government as well? Voting by mail is already reasonably easy to secure.

              • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                This destroys anonymity its a public ledger and how do you imagine that helps security. Your vote is only as secure as your shitty insecure computer.

                • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyzOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  It’s pseudonymous and is the best anonymous voting option we have. They aren’t actually tied to people’s personal information and you know this. A blockchain will therefore be perfectly fine.

                  If no electronic option is good enough for you, remember the tyrants of today and yesterday have already mastered rigging the paper ballot and they likely already do have your voting history tabulated in some archive somewhere. If you think blockchains are a security nightmare, then the ID system to tie voters to paper ballots will give you PTSD.

                  • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    There is no reason to believe that paper ballots aren’t securable NOW and no reason to believe we will ever be able to secure electronic voting.

                    If you want to using cryptography print a challenge on the ballot have them type the number into 90s era flip phone sized device and have them write the response on the ballot. Without understanding anything about crypto they and the government both have half of a key and nobody can fool anyone.

                    Mathematically impossible to commit fraud based on math that has been given massive attention by a small army of very smart people.

          • derpgon@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            FOSS has nothing to do with security. Decentralization works as long as there are more good than bad actors, otherwise you got a recipe for disaster.

    • arthur@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There are voting methods hard to explain, this one is quite easy: “the winner must win against most of the other candidates on a 1x1 comparison”

      And to avoid making n² voting rounds, we rank our preferences, the first beats all, the second beats all but the first…

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Still overly complicated, especially for American minds who have been trimmed for decades to rate anything scientific as work of the devil…

        • arthur@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If people can get sports leagues rules to win a championship, they can get this.