4 ms·

Okay, so you will only accept some theoretical, idealistic, perfect voting system, which at this time does not exist. And until one is invented, you want all no

Okay, so you will only accept some theoretical, idealistic, perfect voting system, which at this time does not exist. And until one is invented, you want all non-perfect voting systems to be "literally unconstitutional". How do you want government to function until a perfect voting system is invented? Should we just have dictatorship until that time?

unethical_ban 2y ago
Decentralized paper ballot systems are counted locally, by people who live in your communities, and are plainly readable. This makes widespread, centralized election tampering much more difficult, in ways even a moron can usually grasp. (Edit: I mean the general public, not any reader here) Election skepticism is only going to get worse with China and Russia ramping up their neverending quest to discredit democracy. An unfortunate reality is that we need to operate our elections in ways that are unquestionably understandable and plainly resistant to tampering. Another example is voting systems. There are several voting systems that are objectively better than Instant Runoff Voting, but they require algebra to determine the winner. If the system isn't demonstrable in a short video or infographic, it is too complex for general population elections.
matheusmoreira 2y ago
No one said anything about "perfect". I said black box systems that nobody but "experts" understand should be literally outlawed. Nowhere did I claim the system had to be "perfect". It needs to be a simple enough system that even laymen can understand, not some computer black box. What you fail to understand is that an "election" whose results can't be trusted is equivalent to a dictatorship. Actually they are even worse than dictatorships. In a dictatorship, at least you know you are being oppressed. When unreliable elections are institutionalized, they give an air of legitimacy to the dictator's rule, you're constantly gaslit by the dictator and his political and ideological supporters into believing that the oppression is just the democratic process at work.
- baobabKoodaa 2y ago
  The average voter does not understand how a typical paper ballot system can be audited, or what coercion resistance properties the system has. It is not "simple enough system that even laymen can understand".

unethical_ban 2y ago

Decentralized paper ballot systems are counted locally, by people who live in your communities, and are plainly readable. This makes widespread, centralized election tampering much more difficult, in ways even a moron can usually grasp. (Edit: I mean the general public, not any reader here) Election skepticism is only going to get worse with China and Russia ramping up their neverending quest to discredit democracy. An unfortunate reality is that we need to operate our elections in ways that are unquestionably understandable and plainly resistant to tampering. Another example is voting systems. There are several voting systems that are objectively better than Instant Runoff Voting, but they require algebra to determine the winner. If the system isn't demonstrable in a short video or infographic, it is too complex for general population elections.

matheusmoreira 2y ago

No one said anything about "perfect". I said black box systems that nobody but "experts" understand should be literally outlawed. Nowhere did I claim the system had to be "perfect". It needs to be a simple enough system that even laymen can understand, not some computer black box. What you fail to understand is that an "election" whose results can't be trusted is equivalent to a dictatorship. Actually they are even worse than dictatorships. In a dictatorship, at least you know you are being oppressed. When unreliable elections are institutionalized, they give an air of legitimacy to the dictator's rule, you're constantly gaslit by the dictator and his political and ideological supporters into believing that the oppression is just the democratic process at work.

baobabKoodaa 2y ago
The average voter does not understand how a typical paper ballot system can be audited, or what coercion resistance properties the system has. It is not "simple enough system that even laymen can understand".