29 ms·

Did You Vote? Now Your Friends May Know (and Nag You)

133 points by dpeck 8y ago

monochromatic 8y ago
That's horrible. "There ought to be a law!"
- markovbot 8y ago
  States oughta not give out that data.
  - ckarmann 8y ago
    I'm French and when I hear about this kind of things in the USA, I wonder why this data even exists? Why do people register as Democrat or Republican in the first place and why do the laws even allow it? I understand that it facilitates the organisation by the state of the primary elections. But it so obviously goes against basic principles of confidentiality of vote that it far outweighs the purposed benefits. And why don't the parties organize their own primaries?
    - r00fus 8y ago
      We have primaries in the US as opposed to the French "all candidates primary election + (almost guaranteed) runoff 2nd election" In many jurisdictions can't vote in a party's primary unless you belong to that party.
      - jcranmer 8y ago
        France does have primaries, and I'm not referring to the first round of the general election. Les Républicains voted to select Fillon over Juppé in 2016, for example, in such a primary. The US's political system is basically set up in a way that prevents more than two political parties feasibly existing. Some states have decided to ameliorate the two-party situation by tweaking the primary system to act as a pretend first round of the election instead of making the actual election be two rounds or other alternatives to first-past-the-post elections. Such a primary is known as a "jungle primary." Personally, I've only lived in states that have open primaries (anyone can participate in the primary), or semi-open primaries (independents voters can participate in any primary; declared voters must participate only in their own party's). I'd personally prefer a blanket primary (you can choose the primary to vote in on a per-party basis), but the Supreme Court ruled that it unconstitutionally violated the freedom of association in the First Amendment. One thing to remember about US elections: there's not one set of rules that governs everything. There's generally at least 50 different sets of rules, one for each state; and even then, you can get different rules for different races. Generalization is therefore quite difficult for US elections.
    - labster 8y ago
      Americans don't think that revealing party membership is violates any privacy. The reason it is available is that the parties need lists of their members, and campaigns and political orgs need lists of people to mobilize to vote. This helps us target slate mailers, phone calls, media advertising, as well as look at who is elderly and might need transportation to the polls. In California, the list of people who voted is posted hourly tomorrow, so I get to walk around and remind my party's people to get to the polls.
      - zrobotics 8y ago
        Why do we consider "get out the vote" efforts to be a good thing, though? If someone doesn't care enough to bother to vote without being nagged, are they providing any sort of meaningful input? How considered will their choice be? Ive always thought such efforts are another symptom of 'us vs. them", where the only goal is to get more of your members to vote. I think it would be aassive improvement if this information wasn't even part of voter registration. If you want to be a Democrat or Republican and vote in the primaries, that shouldn't be part of voter registration, you should have to separately register with your party of choice. Because I just don't see any reason that anything you mentioned (targeted advertising, targeted transportation for the elderly) is at all a net positive for democracy.
        matthewbauer 8y ago
        I don’t think anyone is necessarily saying it’s good - just a necessary part of winning elections. Lots of people are forgetful or busy and may need some extra push to cast a ballot. If you have a political preference, it makes sense to try to get friends and family to vote with you. This kind of thing has happened in every election to some extents. The app just makes it a little creepier...
        danso 8y ago
        I think ideally the government sees it as net positive for democracy to maximize the participation of as much of its electorate as possible, in order for the process, and the winners, to have as much legitimacy and buy-in as possible. In an ideal world, no one would have to be "nagged", but realistically, everyone has limits on their time and attention span. Why is the college student who finally agrees to go with a friend any less of a valued participant than the retired citizen who has no other time commitments? Party affiliation is part of voter registration in the states that run primaries. Primaries are not part of the Constitution, and before the 1970s, party candidates were picked via convention, i.e. party elites. Making the primary vote accessible to all voters was ostensibly an attempt to democratize the selection process. Seems like it'd be logistically difficult to hold party votes without having a record of voter affiliation.
    - int_19h 8y ago
      > And why don't the parties organize their own primaries? Historically, they did just that. But historically, the two-party system translated to one-party rule in many places - most notably, post-Reconstruction South, where Democrats were the party. And their primary - ran by the party itself - was organized according to the principles of that party. So, for example, only whites could vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_primaries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_primaries In the Civil Rights era, that arrangement was challenged on the grounds that the primaries become the de facto election, and when the party gets to run them as it sees fit, it's undemocratic. And so there was a gradual process of having primaries more regulated, and in particular, having them run by the state governments rather than the parties themselves. As a result, today, we have things like "open primaries" (where anybody can vote without having to be a party member or declare affiliation), and even "top-two primaries", where the primary is basically the first round of the two-round general election, and not really a primary at all.
- astura 8y ago
  There is a law, the law says all this information if public.
  - housingpost 8y ago
    Depends on the state. California has usage restrictions, and I’m pretty sure these violate them. I’ll find out soon since I’ve filed complaints with the California attorney general about all of the apps.
    - danso 8y ago
      From the statute: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=6254.4 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.... > (a) The home address, telephone number, email address, precinct number, or other number specified by the Secretary of State for voter registration purposes, and prior registration information shown on the affidavit of registration, is confidential and shall not be disclosed to any person, except pursuant to Section 2194 of the Elections Code. Section 2194 (3) of the Elections Code: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=ELEC&sectionNum=2194 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.... > Shall be provided with respect to any voter, subject to the provisions of Sections 2166, 2166.5, 2166.7, and 2188, to any candidate for federal, state, or local office, to any committee for or against any initiative or referendum measure for which legal publication is made, and to any person for election, scholarly, journalistic, or political purposes, or for governmental purposes, as determined by the Secretary of State. Both OutVote and VoteWithMe state political and election purposes in their respective About pages: > VoteWithMe is powered by The New Data Project. In the current climate, causes and campaigns too often lack the time, expertise, and flexibility to work beyond immediate deadlines. The New Data Project (NDP) is a new 501(c)(4) organization built to address this gap by testing new approaches, looking beyond the current cycle, and serving as an advanced technology research lab for progressives. [0] > Our mission is to promote voter participation within progressive campaigns, this November and beyond. [1] [0] https://votewithme.us/about.html https://votewithme.us/about.html [1] https://www.outvote.io/faqs https://www.outvote.io/faqs
    - 8y ago
dpeck 8y ago
mods, I went with the caption vs the clickbait title, if it needs to be something else mod away.
- dang 8y ago
  In a strange way I think that title ("See the Voting Histories of Your Friends and Family (OutVote S18)") may have unintentionally been even more baity, because a lot of commenters seem confused by the phrase "voting history". So maybe we'll try the main article title for a while.
  - dpeck 8y ago
    you may just be right. Hard to not trigger the sensationalization instincts with this story regardless of title.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
sonnyblarney 8y ago
This is terrible and reminds me of that South Park episode where everyone murders everyone else 'no secrets'. In Scandinavian countries I think you can look up someone's income tax - but it's a little bit bureaucratic and that person will also be notified that you looked them up. Not sure if it's necessary, but the sharing logic is necessary. If you want to know how someone voted, you have to pay $5 for each person, they will be notified, and you can't publish the information, or something like that. Or better yet - it should be confidential.
- JamesBarney 8y ago
  I don't think you can tell how someone voted. It pulls the party affiliation off of which primary you voted in.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Sorry, I was technically incorrect. But the pragmatism of: they were a member of X party during Y election is a very close proxy to 'how they voted' - moreover, the motivation of the app makers is still oriented towards the publishing of essentially private information i.e. voting orientation. Which is not helpful. I believe Americans are far less extreme than the pop culture news outlets (basically almost all cable news) would have us believe. If you check Pew polling there is actually wide consensus on a lot of issues which see partisan but are really not.
- bemmu 8y ago
  In Finland anyone can check these online for free. For example the income of SuperCell and MySQL founders: https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1978Paananen%20Ilkka%20Matias https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1978Paananen%20Ilkka%20Matias https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1962Widenius%20Ulf%20Michael https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1962Widenius%20Ulf%20Michael
- sfRattan 8y ago
  For those who remember it, the peer pressure and shaming implications of these apps remind me more of the season 8 episode, "Douche and Turd." Particularly how everyone in the town ostracizes Stan until he's willing to vote, even though he doesn't really care and doesn't like either choice.[1] I guess South Park is like the Simpsons now... There's literally an episode for every situation. [1]: http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Douche_and_Turd http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Douche_and_Turd
andrew_ 8y ago
I understand that the apps discussed in the article are voluntary and used by people who want to share that information. But this relatively recent obsession over political alignment remains troubling. I'm old enough to remember when voting choices were considered a private matter. Today's climate is largely unconducive to polite discourse, and these apps strike me as another opportunity for people to share "too much" information, which provide an avenue for further weaponizing of public judgement.
- dpeck 8y ago
  Its not voluntary, this is publicly accessible information. A friend of mine looked it up for Georgia and iirc its $50 for a CD full of CSV files with this info. Someone built an app around that.
  - jniedrauer 8y ago
    It's not a bug, it's a feature!
- greglindahl 8y ago
  I'm a little mystified how you could have read the article and made this comment. Choosing to register with a party and choosing to vote are choices, but they've never been private ones. Your actual vote is a private matter. > Whom Americans vote for is private. But other information in their state voter files is public information; depending on the state, it can include details like their name, address, phone number and party affiliation and when they voted.
  - stale2002 8y ago
    Sure they have been private. With the internet it has never been easier to learn every little detail about a random individual on the other side of the world. Practically speaking, this information very much was private, using the definition of "private" that I define as "difficult to learn".
    - 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
King-Aaron 8y ago
WOW, I was under the impression that part of the promoted benefits of the democratic process was anonymity in your voting preferences. Double wow that Ycombinator sponsored this.
- ericcumbee 8y ago
  It does not say how you vote. Other than the fact that in a primary you pulled a republican or democratic ballot. But the people you actually vote for are a secret.
  - King-Aaron 8y ago
    Forgive me not knowing how it goes in the United States, but here in my electorate there is generally only one or at most a handful of candidates who you can vote for in each party. It would not be hard to narrow down who you vote for based on the party you selected. That being said, even knowing which side of politics your peers vote for would be sufficient to harass them over it. I don't understand why anyone would think this is a good thing.
    - labster 8y ago
      So knowing another person is from a different political party inevitably leads to harassment? I guess it really is 2018 in America. Back in my day voting wasn't such a tribal affair.
      - King-Aaron 8y ago
        That's kind of the reason why most ballots are cast anonymously to begin with. I'm sure back in your day (which is a fairly arbitrary thing to say, really) this was no different.
  - sremani 8y ago
    Their "Our Trusted Partners" does not encourage me to believe they are non-partisan. YC stamp on this makes me a bit sad, but their actions have been swinging left for a while now. edit: (their partisan statement is upfront) Outvote empowers progressives like you to mobilize your contacts to get out and vote.
synaesthesisx 8y ago
Not just friends and family but employers, coworkers etc. Apparently if you pay for premium (beta) you can even see their previous ballots and detailed voting histories! /s
- r00fus 8y ago
  I hope you're joking about that last point.
  - synaesthesisx 8y ago
    Right, but it seems to be the direction we're headed in. Imagine instead a premium model where you have the option to pay to hide your information (just like paying GitHub for private repos). Privacy for pay - this is we're headed toward as a society. Shame on YC for supporting this.
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
      This app isn't collecting any data about voting. You describe an endpoint that could be worrying, and I could see paths to get there, but the path you're describing is nonsense. Get a coherent thesis before you start calling for shame.
astura 8y ago
>“I don’t want this to come off like we’re shaming our friends into voting,” said Naseem Makiya, the chief executive of OutVote, a start-up in Boston. But, he said, “I think a lot of people might vote just because they’re frankly worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t.” That's like, dictionary definition of shaming. Waiiiiittttt, back that train right up! What exactly does this person think "shaming friends into voting" is if it's not "vot[ing] just because they’re worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t?" I don't really care about these apps either way, just... how does anyone have such a lack of self awareness?
- zrobotics 8y ago
  Well, he looked at the current privacy climate (especially around social media) and thought this was a good idea. I'd say it's safe to assume he isn't all that socially aware. I can say for sure that I received one of these messages from one of my contacts, I'm damn sure shaming that person back for using this service. I'm thinking twitter/Facebook post naming and shaming, along with an explanation about how that contact was clueless enough to share their whole phone book with this app. I for one don't trust them not to do anything shady with that info.
jpfed 8y ago
For people in this thread that are alarmed by the fact that voting records contain information about your party affiliation- note that this is not true in every state! The fact that many states keep records of party affiliation is neither a necessary part of the democratic process nor is it an immutable fact of nature. It may be possible to change how voting records are kept or handled with ballot initiatives.
donatj 8y ago
Given the rapid rise of politicaly motivated violence, I think it’s likely best to keep my vote to myself.
- bskap 8y ago
  Who you voted for is private. The fact that you voted is public- anyone can get that from the state, no need for you to volunteer it.
- friedman23 8y ago
  You can't even share your phone number and birth day now.
- pluma 8y ago
  Given the rapid rise of politically motivated violence, you can consider yourself lucky if the only thing making you a target is who you voted for. If you're being "oppressed" for your public political affiliation (including party membership), you're not oppressed.
  - swebs 8y ago
    >If you're being "oppressed" for your public political affiliation (including party membership), you're not oppressed. This is the most ridiculous statement in the entire thread.
ajross 8y ago
What has happened to HN? The second paragraph of the article explains quite clearly that these apps display only the fact of a ballot having been cast, not the votes. Yet I count no less than seven posts here railing about exactly the wrong thing. Yes, people: the secret ballot is an important part of democracy, and this has nothing to do with that. To be sure, it's one of those social network paradigms that have unindended consequences. And those are worth discussing. But only if you read the article!
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
  > Yes, people: the secret ballot is an important part of democracy, and this has nothing to do with that. After downloading the VoteWithMe app, I call major bullshit on this. The app shows big "Rs" or "Ds" next to folks based on whether they voted in a Democratic or Replublican primary. I do of course realize this was not private information previously, but when the vast majority of viable candidates are from one of the too major parties, that big R or D would seem to take a huge part of the "secret" out of the secret ballot.
  - ajross 8y ago
    You genuinely feel that registering with a party so you can vote in its primary elections is... a violation of the idea of a secret ballot? I'll just come out and say it: people who have problems with this aren't worried about the sanctity of elections at all. They're personally worried about being outed to their friends as holding political beliefs other than those they present to their peer group. If you don't want people to know you're a republican, change your registration.
    - friedman23 8y ago
      Good thinking, that way republicans can self select for even more extremism. I truly hope that you don't ever need to live in fear of having your political beliefs exposed to your co workers or boss.
keiferski 8y ago
The apps’ developers say they are simply democratizing access to these public records. This is the exact same argument that is often used to push public surveillance: “Well, you were out in public and visible anyway, we’re just making it easier to access this data.”
- dtornabene 8y ago
  True! Its also a bold face lie. By the very fact that these records are public makes them more or less "democratized" already. These apps are there to monetize public information for private profit, with a patina of pseudo-civic morality. I'm glad I wasn't the only one who read this and jumped at that awful line, albeit for different reasons.
  - matthewbauer 8y ago
    Where is the private profit in increased voter turnout?
    - visarga 8y ago
      They could sell 'electoral services' to parties (or party sponsors).
    - dtornabene 8y ago
      did you read the article? Its plainly stated for both apps halfway down. Their monetizing access, selling data to campaigns.
    - ameister14 8y ago
      NGP Van is a private consulting company providing tech to the Democratic party. This is something that increases their ability to sell and leverage data.
- specialist 8y ago
  The voter registry and voting history are public records, by necessity. Because democracy You're aware that i360 on the right and NGP VAN on the left have already weaponized this data? Who do you think you're protecting?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
augustocallejas 8y ago
About 6 years ago, for the 2012 election, I wrote my first iOS app called SuperVote (http://supervote.org http://supervote.org) where Facebook users would voluntarily share their endorsements on a shared ballot, allowing you to see how your friends and family plan to vote (especially useful for California, and all the ballot initiatives). It got about 100 users, but didn't really take off, so I didn't continue updating it. At this point, considering the state of politics and Facebook, I would not go about the same venture anymore.
- 24gttghh 8y ago
  Isn't it illegal to publicize exactly who a given person voted for? Seems like basically this: https://www.propublica.org/article/why-it-may-be-illegal-to-instagram-your-ballot https://www.propublica.org/article/why-it-may-be-illegal-to-...
  - pessimizer 8y ago
    You're not seriously saying that it's illegal to publicly endorse voting for a particular candidate? It is usually illegal to show proof of who you voted for, and absolutely should be, everywhere. People have to take your word for it. The ability to provide evidence of who you voted for creates the ability for others to demand evidence of who you voted for.
    - 24gttghh 8y ago
      Legally, I understand the distinction but publicizing exactly who you voted for seems like it could have similar repercussions in terms of voter intimidation.
      - tomjen3 8y ago
        If you threaten me to vote for a specific party and all I can say is that I did so, your threat is not great. If you can threaten me, and after that make me prove what I voted for, the threat is much more effective.
keiferski 8y ago
Anyone can use the apps, but executives say they hope to improve voter turnout particularly among young Democrats. The VoteWithMe app, for instance, is preset to show likely Democrats among a user’s contacts. Users must change the app’s settings to see the voting histories of all of their contacts. This, combined with the “Our Trusted Partners” section, clearly shows that this isn’t about getting people out to vote in order to strengthen the democratic process - it’s about supporting a particular political party. As an independent, this is really troubling. It will only result in more tribalism and more shaming for having “undesirable” party registration. Yeah, your actual vote is still private. But considering that mere membership of a party has been an issue in the past, this isn’t very reassuring. Then again, maybe it will lead to an implosion of the party system and a shift to independent voters.
- davidw 8y ago
  > Then again, maybe it will lead to an implosion of the party system and a shift to independent voters. Ranked Choice voting would generally be a good move in that direction. Edit I'm also going to add that this isn't a great time to sit on the fence: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/03/why-the-mid-terms-matter https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/03/why-the-mid-ter... https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/11/04/election-referendum-trump-corrosive-changes-american-politics-column/1871790002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/11/04/election-r...
  - bhauer 8y ago
    Yes. Score voting or approval voting would be my preference. Easier to use and even more expressive for voters. https://electology.org/score-voting https://electology.org/score-voting https://www.counted.vote/ https://www.counted.vote/
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      Score and approval have inconsistent meaning for ballot markings, and are for that reasons bad mechanisms unless that is resolved (approval is ideal for choosing group activities where either voting approve is a commitment to participate if that option wins or disapprove is a binding opt-out.)
randomname2 8y ago
Does anyone else find this creepy and Orwellian?
- ilikehurdles 8y ago
  Yes. Also incredibly annoying. “Nag” is right. I hope I never get contacted by friends using this junk.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Some of the parts about having to register for a specific party because of primaries, yeah. Listing whether someone voted and bugging them about it? Not at all. It's the knockoff form of making voting mandatory. Just do your duty and fill out the piece of paper. No one can see what's on it.
- pluma 8y ago
  I wish people would stop using the phrase "Orwellian" for everything they consider intrusive.
pg_bot 8y ago
Not voting is a legitimate choice.
- matthewbauer 8y ago
  And nagging friends and family who make that choice is also legitimate :)
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    It could be viewed as stalking their behavior through public records, which some might be find a bit more questionable.
- sagichmal 8y ago
  It certainly is not.
  - baddox 8y ago
    I disagree. Clearly people disagree.
- patejam 8y ago
  Not really. The only legitimate reason to choose to not vote is if the top candidates are legitimately equally bad in your eyes. This almost never happens. "I don't like either of them" is not a logical reason not to vote. Choose the one you least dislike. Otherwise you're effectively voting against your interests by denying a vote to someone who would be better for you than the opposition. (This ignores other reasons not to vote that aren't really a choice. eg. you can't get off work or don't have time or something)
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    > The only legitimate reason to choose to not vote is if the top candidates are legitimately equally bad in your eyes In every race. And there have to be no other issues on the ballot. Voting isn't just about 1-3 people to send to DC.
gnicholas 8y ago
Various folks are talking about the fact that voter history (though not actual votes cast) is public information. I recently learned from a candidate for local office that the email address that I put down when registering to vote can be purchased by any candidate. I didn't realize that by providing my email address on a government form, I would be opening myself up to spam from literally any candidate — local, state, or national. And of course, on all of these emails, it says at the bottom "you are receiving this email because you signed up on our website." Not exactly!
fzeroracer 8y ago
There are multiple things to take into consideration here. For example, there are arguments made that we need to have more strict voter ID laws in order to prevent potential undesirables from voting. Yet that necessitates gathering more data from citizens. If we want the government to be transparent and open with the data it collects, then that necessitates making that data public. It's a very difficult act to balance having an open government while expecting data the government collects to be private, because otherwise you end up with cases like voters conspicuously dropped from voter rolls using information that is unverifiable and unable to be accounted for by the public. There's also considerations to be made when an act of public policy can directly affect large portions of the population. For example people who might vote to remove or lessen the rights for minorities are entitled to privacy even though their actions can cause direct harm to vulnerable populations. This is made worse through voter suppression as people vote in favor of actions that cement their own power without recourse. At the same time I can understand why privacy is necessary because in the era of Big Business, it's not unfathomable to imagine businesses using public data like that to make decisions on who to hire or to threaten employees into voting for policies that directly help them. Yet I can't help but feel that people who are ashamed of whom they vote for are people that know some of the policies they're voting for are bad in one way or another, but chooses to support them anyways, although that veers into the 'nothing to hide' argument.
yuchi 8y ago
In Italy the secrecy of the vote means that people have the right to keep it secret, not the obligation to do so! Is it any different in the US?
- LoSboccacc 8y ago
  It also means you can't prove what party you voted, the point is both protect from repercussions and avoid vote selling, but yet can still happen in the smaller municipalities, since you can theoretically* buy the town whole and detract money for every vote missing Even in Italy however you needed to "tesserate" to vote for party primaries, so who has those archives knows at least how involved you are with this or that party because there's a certain correlation between party registration and voting patterns *Theoretically that's also why you see percentages approaching 100% for one candidate in many small Sicilian towns
  - yuchi 8y ago
    I never knew those figures in southern Italy. Thanks for sharing.
teekert 8y ago
This is way to important to be done by a closed source, nontransparent party. How can this be legal? And is not voting not also a fundamental right? Imagine an app tries to mess with your right to vote instead of your right to not vote...
JohnTClark 8y ago
It's a bad idea. I got guilt tripped by my friends a year for not voting in the parliament election (not from US). “I don’t want this to come off like we’re shaming our friends into voting,” said Naseem Makiya, the chief executive of OutVote, a start-up in Boston. But, he said, “I think a lot of people might vote just because they’re frankly worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t.” It's incredible to me how some people can make a bad idea look nice by using words. "Political science research has shown that people turn out to vote in higher numbers when they think their family and neighbors are observing their civic behavior. The VoteWithMe and OutVote apps simply automate that surveillance and social pressure." It is because of fear and the bad thing is that it's harder to fight against these ideas that use nice words like "research", "strengthen democracy" because you come off like being anti democracy, anti science etc. In communist Romania there were elections and if you didn't participate there where bad consequences and because of that there were 99.9% turnout but I would not consider that a victory for democracy. Some people say that if you voted or not is public record. Yes it is public but there is a difference between 1 click and jumping through some bureaucracy to find that information.
- salvar 8y ago
  > Some people say that if you voted or not is public record. Yes it is public but there is a difference between 1 click and jumping through some bureaucracy to find that information. Would you call that bureaucracy an important feature then?
a_imho 8y ago
Democracy would be better off without voting, Sortition [1] is vastly superior method of electing representatives. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition
- dannyw 8y ago
  With a big drawback of zero accountability for candidates.
  - a_imho 8y ago
    What threat model do you have in mind? I don't think voting every 4 years helps with accountability that much either in practice.
tomohawk 8y ago
Voting should be completely private, including the fact of whether a person voted or not. It's that person's choice, and not voting is just a valid of a choice, and deserves to be kept private. This is how the ballot boxes get stuffed. The fraudsters figure out who doesn't vote, who's dead but still on the roles, etc, and stuff the boxes with votes for those people. Here's an infamous example: https://www.nytimes.com/1978/12/17/archives/followers-say-jim-jones-directed-voting-frauds-busloads-of-voters.html https://www.nytimes.com/1978/12/17/archives/followers-say-ji...
- foozed 8y ago
  oh come on, "choosing" to not vote is most often choosing to be lazy. If you want to express resistance to the dominant parties you vote independent or invalid but if you care about democracy you still go vote.
  - kotajacob 8y ago
    and for people whom do not care about democracy and or do not believe we are in a democracy then?
    - Draiken 8y ago
      That's the question that nobody ever answers. I'm not american but I live in a country where I believe does not employ true democracy. I actually question the ability of the majority to decide on anything, but in either case, how do you get out of that? Here voting is mandatory which means even people that don't even know who the candidates are, have the same political power as I do. Voting feels like a sad joke that the rich and powerful gave us so we can pretend we are "in control". In reality money votes, not people.
    - elicash 8y ago
      On the latter, if you don't believe we are a democracy, then I want to see your plan for turning us into one. If you're going to make that claim, you better be willing to put in the work given what others have sacrificed for our right to vote.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
chiefalchemist 8y ago
Not to get off topic but it's worth mentioning that, by definition, voting and electios help to establish and elevate confirmation bias. For a scientific view on why we struggle to come together I'd recommend "The Influence Mind" by Tali Sharot. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/books/review/the-influential-mind-tali-sharot-decision-making.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/books/review/the-influent...
aaron695 8y ago
In some countries they stain your finger to show you have voted, it lasts days to a week. It's used to stop voter fraud like voting twice. It has also been documented to have been used to coerce people into voting for 'certain' people. If you vote should be as secret as who you vote for.
dev_north_east 8y ago
If someone did this, they wouldn't be my friend anymore.
nothingtodo 8y ago
Only a bunch of tone deaf assholes would think this is a good idea in this political climate. What a nice way to make it easier for other assholes to find out which political "tribe" someone belongs to and discriminate against them when it comes to getting a mortgage, employment, admissions to schools etc. Nice going assholes, you made the world just a little bit worse.
elicash 8y ago
I’m pro vote shaming. Voting is not just a right, it’s a civic responsibility. I don’t like when people who don’t get their pay docked complain and try to get out of jury duty, either. It’s selfish, if you simply choose to leave the work of democracy to other people. And ungrateful for those who sacrificed to protect our rights. I live in a co-op building. Folks on the board make sure leaky pipes are fixed, welcome new neighbors, renovate the lobby, and a thousand other things. So yeah, if I don’t show up to the annual meeting to do the absolute minimum to vote, when I have the ability to do so, I’m being a selfish asshole to my neighbors. I’d deserve a bit of shaming. I’ll soften the stand to note that there are more barriers to voting for some than others - barriers that can all be fixed through policies, however. Edit: I’ll add that even if you’re against vote shaming, this data is important to be public for other reasons. Yesterday I was making phone calls specifically to infrequent voters as a volunteer, many of whom aren’t aware there is an election or had no idea where to go to vote. Those folks who simply don’t know and need help are routinely the nicest and most appreciative of getting calls from strangers.
afriend4lyfe 8y ago
This is a blatant violation and misuse of voter files. In Illinois, for instance, "Voter data is available to registered political committees for bonafide political purposes. Use for commercial solicitation or other business purposes is prohibited."[1] I've been noticing a trend where more and more average Joes are just downloading these files and doing whatever they want with them (specifically, ad targeting). So it's not hard to imagine what malicious state actors have been doing with them. And on a social level, it feels as tho these apps are in violation of the spirit of the voter files purpose. With these specific apps it appears to be a classic case of "it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission". 1. https://www.elections.il.gov/votinginformation/computerizedvoterdata.aspx https://www.elections.il.gov/votinginformation/computerizedv...
Krasnol 8y ago
God I'm happy to live in a country where this data doesn't even exist. Voting in Germany is secret. You get your voting information automatically if you are eligible and you send either a anonymous letter or take a pen and go to put an X on a piece of paper.
vectorEQ 8y ago
should communities come together and share their ideas, vote together for a better future ?? wtf is wrong with your friends or contacts knowing what you voted? so ashamed of your own opinions?? :s or are all your friends so shallow to judge you on sight for some vote you gave instead of being i=interested in you as a person and wondering why you have a different opinion. the hell is wrong with people!
- xcfsadfasdfas 8y ago
  I don't have any social media and I don't use Google. Because I don't want anyone to known anything about me that I don't tell them Its my own business what I believe in, thank you very much. "interested in you as a person and wondering why you have a different opinion." who I vote for (I don't) is irrelevant to what I believe. My friends and I have lively discussions about things I really care for ([0]) and they're never on the ballot. [0] - Does infinity really exist? - Is the halting theorem fundamentally flawed? - What is the nature, if any, of God? - Are Judaism and Islam essentially the same? - What piece of music has moved you in a transcendental way? And that doesn't get to the largest (by far) topic when I'm with friends, which are our kids and how to do what is best for them. We keep out politics to ourselves, thank you very much.
- modzu 8y ago
  you asked "what the hell is wrong with people" who value their privacy but you think if they shared their political beliefs with you that you wouldn't sound judgmental? lol

133 points by dpeck 8y ago

monochromatic 8y ago

That's horrible. "There ought to be a law!"

markovbot 8y ago
States oughta not give out that data.
- ckarmann 8y ago
  I'm French and when I hear about this kind of things in the USA, I wonder why this data even exists? Why do people register as Democrat or Republican in the first place and why do the laws even allow it? I understand that it facilitates the organisation by the state of the primary elections. But it so obviously goes against basic principles of confidentiality of vote that it far outweighs the purposed benefits. And why don't the parties organize their own primaries?
  - r00fus 8y ago
    We have primaries in the US as opposed to the French "all candidates primary election + (almost guaranteed) runoff 2nd election" In many jurisdictions can't vote in a party's primary unless you belong to that party.
    - jcranmer 8y ago
      France does have primaries, and I'm not referring to the first round of the general election. Les Républicains voted to select Fillon over Juppé in 2016, for example, in such a primary. The US's political system is basically set up in a way that prevents more than two political parties feasibly existing. Some states have decided to ameliorate the two-party situation by tweaking the primary system to act as a pretend first round of the election instead of making the actual election be two rounds or other alternatives to first-past-the-post elections. Such a primary is known as a "jungle primary." Personally, I've only lived in states that have open primaries (anyone can participate in the primary), or semi-open primaries (independents voters can participate in any primary; declared voters must participate only in their own party's). I'd personally prefer a blanket primary (you can choose the primary to vote in on a per-party basis), but the Supreme Court ruled that it unconstitutionally violated the freedom of association in the First Amendment. One thing to remember about US elections: there's not one set of rules that governs everything. There's generally at least 50 different sets of rules, one for each state; and even then, you can get different rules for different races. Generalization is therefore quite difficult for US elections.
  - labster 8y ago
    Americans don't think that revealing party membership is violates any privacy. The reason it is available is that the parties need lists of their members, and campaigns and political orgs need lists of people to mobilize to vote. This helps us target slate mailers, phone calls, media advertising, as well as look at who is elderly and might need transportation to the polls. In California, the list of people who voted is posted hourly tomorrow, so I get to walk around and remind my party's people to get to the polls.
    - zrobotics 8y ago
      Why do we consider "get out the vote" efforts to be a good thing, though? If someone doesn't care enough to bother to vote without being nagged, are they providing any sort of meaningful input? How considered will their choice be? Ive always thought such efforts are another symptom of 'us vs. them", where the only goal is to get more of your members to vote. I think it would be aassive improvement if this information wasn't even part of voter registration. If you want to be a Democrat or Republican and vote in the primaries, that shouldn't be part of voter registration, you should have to separately register with your party of choice. Because I just don't see any reason that anything you mentioned (targeted advertising, targeted transportation for the elderly) is at all a net positive for democracy.
      - matthewbauer 8y ago
        I don’t think anyone is necessarily saying it’s good - just a necessary part of winning elections. Lots of people are forgetful or busy and may need some extra push to cast a ballot. If you have a political preference, it makes sense to try to get friends and family to vote with you. This kind of thing has happened in every election to some extents. The app just makes it a little creepier...
      - danso 8y ago
        I think ideally the government sees it as net positive for democracy to maximize the participation of as much of its electorate as possible, in order for the process, and the winners, to have as much legitimacy and buy-in as possible. In an ideal world, no one would have to be "nagged", but realistically, everyone has limits on their time and attention span. Why is the college student who finally agrees to go with a friend any less of a valued participant than the retired citizen who has no other time commitments? Party affiliation is part of voter registration in the states that run primaries. Primaries are not part of the Constitution, and before the 1970s, party candidates were picked via convention, i.e. party elites. Making the primary vote accessible to all voters was ostensibly an attempt to democratize the selection process. Seems like it'd be logistically difficult to hold party votes without having a record of voter affiliation.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    > And why don't the parties organize their own primaries? Historically, they did just that. But historically, the two-party system translated to one-party rule in many places - most notably, post-Reconstruction South, where Democrats were the party. And their primary - ran by the party itself - was organized according to the principles of that party. So, for example, only whites could vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_primaries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_primaries In the Civil Rights era, that arrangement was challenged on the grounds that the primaries become the de facto election, and when the party gets to run them as it sees fit, it's undemocratic. And so there was a gradual process of having primaries more regulated, and in particular, having them run by the state governments rather than the parties themselves. As a result, today, we have things like "open primaries" (where anybody can vote without having to be a party member or declare affiliation), and even "top-two primaries", where the primary is basically the first round of the two-round general election, and not really a primary at all.
astura 8y ago
There is a law, the law says all this information if public.
- housingpost 8y ago
  Depends on the state. California has usage restrictions, and I’m pretty sure these violate them. I’ll find out soon since I’ve filed complaints with the California attorney general about all of the apps.
  - danso 8y ago
    From the statute: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=6254.4 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.... > (a) The home address, telephone number, email address, precinct number, or other number specified by the Secretary of State for voter registration purposes, and prior registration information shown on the affidavit of registration, is confidential and shall not be disclosed to any person, except pursuant to Section 2194 of the Elections Code. Section 2194 (3) of the Elections Code: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=ELEC&sectionNum=2194 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.... > Shall be provided with respect to any voter, subject to the provisions of Sections 2166, 2166.5, 2166.7, and 2188, to any candidate for federal, state, or local office, to any committee for or against any initiative or referendum measure for which legal publication is made, and to any person for election, scholarly, journalistic, or political purposes, or for governmental purposes, as determined by the Secretary of State. Both OutVote and VoteWithMe state political and election purposes in their respective About pages: > VoteWithMe is powered by The New Data Project. In the current climate, causes and campaigns too often lack the time, expertise, and flexibility to work beyond immediate deadlines. The New Data Project (NDP) is a new 501(c)(4) organization built to address this gap by testing new approaches, looking beyond the current cycle, and serving as an advanced technology research lab for progressives. [0] > Our mission is to promote voter participation within progressive campaigns, this November and beyond. [1] [0] https://votewithme.us/about.html https://votewithme.us/about.html [1] https://www.outvote.io/faqs https://www.outvote.io/faqs
  - 8y ago

dpeck 8y ago

mods, I went with the caption vs the clickbait title, if it needs to be something else mod away.

dang 8y ago
In a strange way I think that title ("See the Voting Histories of Your Friends and Family (OutVote S18)") may have unintentionally been even more baity, because a lot of commenters seem confused by the phrase "voting history". So maybe we'll try the main article title for a while.
- dpeck 8y ago
  you may just be right. Hard to not trigger the sensationalization instincts with this story regardless of title.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

sonnyblarney 8y ago

This is terrible and reminds me of that South Park episode where everyone murders everyone else 'no secrets'. In Scandinavian countries I think you can look up someone's income tax - but it's a little bit bureaucratic and that person will also be notified that you looked them up. Not sure if it's necessary, but the sharing logic is necessary. If you want to know how someone voted, you have to pay $5 for each person, they will be notified, and you can't publish the information, or something like that. Or better yet - it should be confidential.

JamesBarney 8y ago
I don't think you can tell how someone voted. It pulls the party affiliation off of which primary you voted in.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Sorry, I was technically incorrect. But the pragmatism of: they were a member of X party during Y election is a very close proxy to 'how they voted' - moreover, the motivation of the app makers is still oriented towards the publishing of essentially private information i.e. voting orientation. Which is not helpful. I believe Americans are far less extreme than the pop culture news outlets (basically almost all cable news) would have us believe. If you check Pew polling there is actually wide consensus on a lot of issues which see partisan but are really not.
bemmu 8y ago
In Finland anyone can check these online for free. For example the income of SuperCell and MySQL founders: https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1978Paananen%20Ilkka%20Matias https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1978Paananen%20Ilkka%20Matias https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1962Widenius%20Ulf%20Michael https://verokone.hs.fi/henkilo/1962Widenius%20Ulf%20Michael
sfRattan 8y ago
For those who remember it, the peer pressure and shaming implications of these apps remind me more of the season 8 episode, "Douche and Turd." Particularly how everyone in the town ostracizes Stan until he's willing to vote, even though he doesn't really care and doesn't like either choice.[1] I guess South Park is like the Simpsons now... There's literally an episode for every situation. [1]: http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Douche_and_Turd http://southpark.wikia.com/wiki/Douche_and_Turd

andrew_ 8y ago

I understand that the apps discussed in the article are voluntary and used by people who want to share that information. But this relatively recent obsession over political alignment remains troubling. I'm old enough to remember when voting choices were considered a private matter. Today's climate is largely unconducive to polite discourse, and these apps strike me as another opportunity for people to share "too much" information, which provide an avenue for further weaponizing of public judgement.

dpeck 8y ago
Its not voluntary, this is publicly accessible information. A friend of mine looked it up for Georgia and iirc its $50 for a CD full of CSV files with this info. Someone built an app around that.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  It's not a bug, it's a feature!
greglindahl 8y ago
I'm a little mystified how you could have read the article and made this comment. Choosing to register with a party and choosing to vote are choices, but they've never been private ones. Your actual vote is a private matter. > Whom Americans vote for is private. But other information in their state voter files is public information; depending on the state, it can include details like their name, address, phone number and party affiliation and when they voted.
- stale2002 8y ago
  Sure they have been private. With the internet it has never been easier to learn every little detail about a random individual on the other side of the world. Practically speaking, this information very much was private, using the definition of "private" that I define as "difficult to learn".
  - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

King-Aaron 8y ago

WOW, I was under the impression that part of the promoted benefits of the democratic process was anonymity in your voting preferences. Double wow that Ycombinator sponsored this.

ericcumbee 8y ago
It does not say how you vote. Other than the fact that in a primary you pulled a republican or democratic ballot. But the people you actually vote for are a secret.
- King-Aaron 8y ago
  Forgive me not knowing how it goes in the United States, but here in my electorate there is generally only one or at most a handful of candidates who you can vote for in each party. It would not be hard to narrow down who you vote for based on the party you selected. That being said, even knowing which side of politics your peers vote for would be sufficient to harass them over it. I don't understand why anyone would think this is a good thing.
  - labster 8y ago
    So knowing another person is from a different political party inevitably leads to harassment? I guess it really is 2018 in America. Back in my day voting wasn't such a tribal affair.
    - King-Aaron 8y ago
      That's kind of the reason why most ballots are cast anonymously to begin with. I'm sure back in your day (which is a fairly arbitrary thing to say, really) this was no different.
- sremani 8y ago
  Their "Our Trusted Partners" does not encourage me to believe they are non-partisan. YC stamp on this makes me a bit sad, but their actions have been swinging left for a while now. edit: (their partisan statement is upfront) Outvote empowers progressives like you to mobilize your contacts to get out and vote.

synaesthesisx 8y ago

Not just friends and family but employers, coworkers etc. Apparently if you pay for premium (beta) you can even see their previous ballots and detailed voting histories! /s

r00fus 8y ago
I hope you're joking about that last point.
- synaesthesisx 8y ago
  Right, but it seems to be the direction we're headed in. Imagine instead a premium model where you have the option to pay to hide your information (just like paying GitHub for private repos). Privacy for pay - this is we're headed toward as a society. Shame on YC for supporting this.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    This app isn't collecting any data about voting. You describe an endpoint that could be worrying, and I could see paths to get there, but the path you're describing is nonsense. Get a coherent thesis before you start calling for shame.

astura 8y ago

>“I don’t want this to come off like we’re shaming our friends into voting,” said Naseem Makiya, the chief executive of OutVote, a start-up in Boston. But, he said, “I think a lot of people might vote just because they’re frankly worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t.” That's like, dictionary definition of shaming. Waiiiiittttt, back that train right up! What exactly does this person think "shaming friends into voting" is if it's not "vot[ing] just because they’re worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t?" I don't really care about these apps either way, just... how does anyone have such a lack of self awareness?

zrobotics 8y ago
Well, he looked at the current privacy climate (especially around social media) and thought this was a good idea. I'd say it's safe to assume he isn't all that socially aware. I can say for sure that I received one of these messages from one of my contacts, I'm damn sure shaming that person back for using this service. I'm thinking twitter/Facebook post naming and shaming, along with an explanation about how that contact was clueless enough to share their whole phone book with this app. I for one don't trust them not to do anything shady with that info.

jpfed 8y ago

For people in this thread that are alarmed by the fact that voting records contain information about your party affiliation- note that this is not true in every state! The fact that many states keep records of party affiliation is neither a necessary part of the democratic process nor is it an immutable fact of nature. It may be possible to change how voting records are kept or handled with ballot initiatives.

donatj 8y ago

Given the rapid rise of politicaly motivated violence, I think it’s likely best to keep my vote to myself.

bskap 8y ago
Who you voted for is private. The fact that you voted is public- anyone can get that from the state, no need for you to volunteer it.
friedman23 8y ago
You can't even share your phone number and birth day now.
pluma 8y ago
Given the rapid rise of politically motivated violence, you can consider yourself lucky if the only thing making you a target is who you voted for. If you're being "oppressed" for your public political affiliation (including party membership), you're not oppressed.
- swebs 8y ago
  >If you're being "oppressed" for your public political affiliation (including party membership), you're not oppressed. This is the most ridiculous statement in the entire thread.

ajross 8y ago

What has happened to HN? The second paragraph of the article explains quite clearly that these apps display only the fact of a ballot having been cast, not the votes. Yet I count no less than seven posts here railing about exactly the wrong thing. Yes, people: the secret ballot is an important part of democracy, and this has nothing to do with that. To be sure, it's one of those social network paradigms that have unindended consequences. And those are worth discussing. But only if you read the article!

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
> Yes, people: the secret ballot is an important part of democracy, and this has nothing to do with that. After downloading the VoteWithMe app, I call major bullshit on this. The app shows big "Rs" or "Ds" next to folks based on whether they voted in a Democratic or Replublican primary. I do of course realize this was not private information previously, but when the vast majority of viable candidates are from one of the too major parties, that big R or D would seem to take a huge part of the "secret" out of the secret ballot.
- ajross 8y ago
  You genuinely feel that registering with a party so you can vote in its primary elections is... a violation of the idea of a secret ballot? I'll just come out and say it: people who have problems with this aren't worried about the sanctity of elections at all. They're personally worried about being outed to their friends as holding political beliefs other than those they present to their peer group. If you don't want people to know you're a republican, change your registration.
  - friedman23 8y ago
    Good thinking, that way republicans can self select for even more extremism. I truly hope that you don't ever need to live in fear of having your political beliefs exposed to your co workers or boss.

keiferski 8y ago

The apps’ developers say they are simply democratizing access to these public records. This is the exact same argument that is often used to push public surveillance: “Well, you were out in public and visible anyway, we’re just making it easier to access this data.”

dtornabene 8y ago
True! Its also a bold face lie. By the very fact that these records are public makes them more or less "democratized" already. These apps are there to monetize public information for private profit, with a patina of pseudo-civic morality. I'm glad I wasn't the only one who read this and jumped at that awful line, albeit for different reasons.
- matthewbauer 8y ago
  Where is the private profit in increased voter turnout?
  - visarga 8y ago
    They could sell 'electoral services' to parties (or party sponsors).
  - dtornabene 8y ago
    did you read the article? Its plainly stated for both apps halfway down. Their monetizing access, selling data to campaigns.
  - ameister14 8y ago
    NGP Van is a private consulting company providing tech to the Democratic party. This is something that increases their ability to sell and leverage data.
specialist 8y ago
The voter registry and voting history are public records, by necessity. Because democracy You're aware that i360 on the right and NGP VAN on the left have already weaponized this data? Who do you think you're protecting?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

augustocallejas 8y ago

About 6 years ago, for the 2012 election, I wrote my first iOS app called SuperVote (http://supervote.org http://supervote.org) where Facebook users would voluntarily share their endorsements on a shared ballot, allowing you to see how your friends and family plan to vote (especially useful for California, and all the ballot initiatives). It got about 100 users, but didn't really take off, so I didn't continue updating it. At this point, considering the state of politics and Facebook, I would not go about the same venture anymore.

24gttghh 8y ago
Isn't it illegal to publicize exactly who a given person voted for? Seems like basically this: https://www.propublica.org/article/why-it-may-be-illegal-to-instagram-your-ballot https://www.propublica.org/article/why-it-may-be-illegal-to-...
- pessimizer 8y ago
  You're not seriously saying that it's illegal to publicly endorse voting for a particular candidate? It is usually illegal to show proof of who you voted for, and absolutely should be, everywhere. People have to take your word for it. The ability to provide evidence of who you voted for creates the ability for others to demand evidence of who you voted for.
  - 24gttghh 8y ago
    Legally, I understand the distinction but publicizing exactly who you voted for seems like it could have similar repercussions in terms of voter intimidation.
    - tomjen3 8y ago
      If you threaten me to vote for a specific party and all I can say is that I did so, your threat is not great. If you can threaten me, and after that make me prove what I voted for, the threat is much more effective.

keiferski 8y ago

Anyone can use the apps, but executives say they hope to improve voter turnout particularly among young Democrats. The VoteWithMe app, for instance, is preset to show likely Democrats among a user’s contacts. Users must change the app’s settings to see the voting histories of all of their contacts. This, combined with the “Our Trusted Partners” section, clearly shows that this isn’t about getting people out to vote in order to strengthen the democratic process - it’s about supporting a particular political party. As an independent, this is really troubling. It will only result in more tribalism and more shaming for having “undesirable” party registration. Yeah, your actual vote is still private. But considering that mere membership of a party has been an issue in the past, this isn’t very reassuring. Then again, maybe it will lead to an implosion of the party system and a shift to independent voters.

davidw 8y ago
> Then again, maybe it will lead to an implosion of the party system and a shift to independent voters. Ranked Choice voting would generally be a good move in that direction. Edit I'm also going to add that this isn't a great time to sit on the fence: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/03/why-the-mid-terms-matter https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/03/why-the-mid-ter... https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/11/04/election-referendum-trump-corrosive-changes-american-politics-column/1871790002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/11/04/election-r...
- bhauer 8y ago
  Yes. Score voting or approval voting would be my preference. Easier to use and even more expressive for voters. https://electology.org/score-voting https://electology.org/score-voting https://www.counted.vote/ https://www.counted.vote/
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    Score and approval have inconsistent meaning for ballot markings, and are for that reasons bad mechanisms unless that is resolved (approval is ideal for choosing group activities where either voting approve is a commitment to participate if that option wins or disapprove is a binding opt-out.)

randomname2 8y ago

Does anyone else find this creepy and Orwellian?

ilikehurdles 8y ago
Yes. Also incredibly annoying. “Nag” is right. I hope I never get contacted by friends using this junk.
Dylan16807 8y ago
Some of the parts about having to register for a specific party because of primaries, yeah. Listing whether someone voted and bugging them about it? Not at all. It's the knockoff form of making voting mandatory. Just do your duty and fill out the piece of paper. No one can see what's on it.
pluma 8y ago
I wish people would stop using the phrase "Orwellian" for everything they consider intrusive.

pg_bot 8y ago

Not voting is a legitimate choice.

matthewbauer 8y ago
And nagging friends and family who make that choice is also legitimate :)
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  It could be viewed as stalking their behavior through public records, which some might be find a bit more questionable.
sagichmal 8y ago
It certainly is not.
- baddox 8y ago
  I disagree. Clearly people disagree.
patejam 8y ago
Not really. The only legitimate reason to choose to not vote is if the top candidates are legitimately equally bad in your eyes. This almost never happens. "I don't like either of them" is not a logical reason not to vote. Choose the one you least dislike. Otherwise you're effectively voting against your interests by denying a vote to someone who would be better for you than the opposition. (This ignores other reasons not to vote that aren't really a choice. eg. you can't get off work or don't have time or something)
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  > The only legitimate reason to choose to not vote is if the top candidates are legitimately equally bad in your eyes In every race. And there have to be no other issues on the ballot. Voting isn't just about 1-3 people to send to DC.

gnicholas 8y ago

Various folks are talking about the fact that voter history (though not actual votes cast) is public information. I recently learned from a candidate for local office that the email address that I put down when registering to vote can be purchased by any candidate. I didn't realize that by providing my email address on a government form, I would be opening myself up to spam from literally any candidate — local, state, or national. And of course, on all of these emails, it says at the bottom "you are receiving this email because you signed up on our website." Not exactly!

fzeroracer 8y ago

There are multiple things to take into consideration here. For example, there are arguments made that we need to have more strict voter ID laws in order to prevent potential undesirables from voting. Yet that necessitates gathering more data from citizens. If we want the government to be transparent and open with the data it collects, then that necessitates making that data public. It's a very difficult act to balance having an open government while expecting data the government collects to be private, because otherwise you end up with cases like voters conspicuously dropped from voter rolls using information that is unverifiable and unable to be accounted for by the public. There's also considerations to be made when an act of public policy can directly affect large portions of the population. For example people who might vote to remove or lessen the rights for minorities are entitled to privacy even though their actions can cause direct harm to vulnerable populations. This is made worse through voter suppression as people vote in favor of actions that cement their own power without recourse. At the same time I can understand why privacy is necessary because in the era of Big Business, it's not unfathomable to imagine businesses using public data like that to make decisions on who to hire or to threaten employees into voting for policies that directly help them. Yet I can't help but feel that people who are ashamed of whom they vote for are people that know some of the policies they're voting for are bad in one way or another, but chooses to support them anyways, although that veers into the 'nothing to hide' argument.

yuchi 8y ago

In Italy the secrecy of the vote means that people have the right to keep it secret, not the obligation to do so! Is it any different in the US?

LoSboccacc 8y ago
It also means you can't prove what party you voted, the point is both protect from repercussions and avoid vote selling, but yet can still happen in the smaller municipalities, since you can theoretically* buy the town whole and detract money for every vote missing Even in Italy however you needed to "tesserate" to vote for party primaries, so who has those archives knows at least how involved you are with this or that party because there's a certain correlation between party registration and voting patterns *Theoretically that's also why you see percentages approaching 100% for one candidate in many small Sicilian towns
- yuchi 8y ago
  I never knew those figures in southern Italy. Thanks for sharing.

teekert 8y ago

This is way to important to be done by a closed source, nontransparent party. How can this be legal? And is not voting not also a fundamental right? Imagine an app tries to mess with your right to vote instead of your right to not vote...

JohnTClark 8y ago

It's a bad idea. I got guilt tripped by my friends a year for not voting in the parliament election (not from US). “I don’t want this to come off like we’re shaming our friends into voting,” said Naseem Makiya, the chief executive of OutVote, a start-up in Boston. But, he said, “I think a lot of people might vote just because they’re frankly worried that their friends will find out if they didn’t.” It's incredible to me how some people can make a bad idea look nice by using words. "Political science research has shown that people turn out to vote in higher numbers when they think their family and neighbors are observing their civic behavior. The VoteWithMe and OutVote apps simply automate that surveillance and social pressure." It is because of fear and the bad thing is that it's harder to fight against these ideas that use nice words like "research", "strengthen democracy" because you come off like being anti democracy, anti science etc. In communist Romania there were elections and if you didn't participate there where bad consequences and because of that there were 99.9% turnout but I would not consider that a victory for democracy. Some people say that if you voted or not is public record. Yes it is public but there is a difference between 1 click and jumping through some bureaucracy to find that information.

salvar 8y ago
> Some people say that if you voted or not is public record. Yes it is public but there is a difference between 1 click and jumping through some bureaucracy to find that information. Would you call that bureaucracy an important feature then?

a_imho 8y ago

Democracy would be better off without voting, Sortition [1] is vastly superior method of electing representatives. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition

dannyw 8y ago
With a big drawback of zero accountability for candidates.
- a_imho 8y ago
  What threat model do you have in mind? I don't think voting every 4 years helps with accountability that much either in practice.

tomohawk 8y ago

Voting should be completely private, including the fact of whether a person voted or not. It's that person's choice, and not voting is just a valid of a choice, and deserves to be kept private. This is how the ballot boxes get stuffed. The fraudsters figure out who doesn't vote, who's dead but still on the roles, etc, and stuff the boxes with votes for those people. Here's an infamous example: https://www.nytimes.com/1978/12/17/archives/followers-say-jim-jones-directed-voting-frauds-busloads-of-voters.html https://www.nytimes.com/1978/12/17/archives/followers-say-ji...

foozed 8y ago
oh come on, "choosing" to not vote is most often choosing to be lazy. If you want to express resistance to the dominant parties you vote independent or invalid but if you care about democracy you still go vote.
- kotajacob 8y ago
  and for people whom do not care about democracy and or do not believe we are in a democracy then?
  - Draiken 8y ago
    That's the question that nobody ever answers. I'm not american but I live in a country where I believe does not employ true democracy. I actually question the ability of the majority to decide on anything, but in either case, how do you get out of that? Here voting is mandatory which means even people that don't even know who the candidates are, have the same political power as I do. Voting feels like a sad joke that the rich and powerful gave us so we can pretend we are "in control". In reality money votes, not people.
  - elicash 8y ago
    On the latter, if you don't believe we are a democracy, then I want to see your plan for turning us into one. If you're going to make that claim, you better be willing to put in the work given what others have sacrificed for our right to vote.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

chiefalchemist 8y ago

Not to get off topic but it's worth mentioning that, by definition, voting and electios help to establish and elevate confirmation bias. For a scientific view on why we struggle to come together I'd recommend "The Influence Mind" by Tali Sharot. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/books/review/the-influential-mind-tali-sharot-decision-making.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/books/review/the-influent...

aaron695 8y ago

In some countries they stain your finger to show you have voted, it lasts days to a week. It's used to stop voter fraud like voting twice. It has also been documented to have been used to coerce people into voting for 'certain' people. If you vote should be as secret as who you vote for.

dev_north_east 8y ago

If someone did this, they wouldn't be my friend anymore.

nothingtodo 8y ago

Only a bunch of tone deaf assholes would think this is a good idea in this political climate. What a nice way to make it easier for other assholes to find out which political "tribe" someone belongs to and discriminate against them when it comes to getting a mortgage, employment, admissions to schools etc. Nice going assholes, you made the world just a little bit worse.

elicash 8y ago

I’m pro vote shaming. Voting is not just a right, it’s a civic responsibility. I don’t like when people who don’t get their pay docked complain and try to get out of jury duty, either. It’s selfish, if you simply choose to leave the work of democracy to other people. And ungrateful for those who sacrificed to protect our rights. I live in a co-op building. Folks on the board make sure leaky pipes are fixed, welcome new neighbors, renovate the lobby, and a thousand other things. So yeah, if I don’t show up to the annual meeting to do the absolute minimum to vote, when I have the ability to do so, I’m being a selfish asshole to my neighbors. I’d deserve a bit of shaming. I’ll soften the stand to note that there are more barriers to voting for some than others - barriers that can all be fixed through policies, however. Edit: I’ll add that even if you’re against vote shaming, this data is important to be public for other reasons. Yesterday I was making phone calls specifically to infrequent voters as a volunteer, many of whom aren’t aware there is an election or had no idea where to go to vote. Those folks who simply don’t know and need help are routinely the nicest and most appreciative of getting calls from strangers.

afriend4lyfe 8y ago

This is a blatant violation and misuse of voter files. In Illinois, for instance, "Voter data is available to registered political committees for bonafide political purposes. Use for commercial solicitation or other business purposes is prohibited."[1] I've been noticing a trend where more and more average Joes are just downloading these files and doing whatever they want with them (specifically, ad targeting). So it's not hard to imagine what malicious state actors have been doing with them. And on a social level, it feels as tho these apps are in violation of the spirit of the voter files purpose. With these specific apps it appears to be a classic case of "it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission". 1. https://www.elections.il.gov/votinginformation/computerizedvoterdata.aspx https://www.elections.il.gov/votinginformation/computerizedv...

Krasnol 8y ago

God I'm happy to live in a country where this data doesn't even exist. Voting in Germany is secret. You get your voting information automatically if you are eligible and you send either a anonymous letter or take a pen and go to put an X on a piece of paper.

vectorEQ 8y ago

should communities come together and share their ideas, vote together for a better future ?? wtf is wrong with your friends or contacts knowing what you voted? so ashamed of your own opinions?? :s or are all your friends so shallow to judge you on sight for some vote you gave instead of being i=interested in you as a person and wondering why you have a different opinion. the hell is wrong with people!

xcfsadfasdfas 8y ago
I don't have any social media and I don't use Google. Because I don't want anyone to known anything about me that I don't tell them Its my own business what I believe in, thank you very much. "interested in you as a person and wondering why you have a different opinion." who I vote for (I don't) is irrelevant to what I believe. My friends and I have lively discussions about things I really care for ([0]) and they're never on the ballot. [0] - Does infinity really exist? - Is the halting theorem fundamentally flawed? - What is the nature, if any, of God? - Are Judaism and Islam essentially the same? - What piece of music has moved you in a transcendental way? And that doesn't get to the largest (by far) topic when I'm with friends, which are our kids and how to do what is best for them. We keep out politics to ourselves, thank you very much.
modzu 8y ago
you asked "what the hell is wrong with people" who value their privacy but you think if they shared their political beliefs with you that you wouldn't sound judgmental? lol