|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Jan 6, 2016 4:56:33 GMT -6
The Electoral Commission has not yet been called upon by the King, though, has it? So none of the Justices know whether they are part of it.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jan 6, 2016 5:05:27 GMT -6
The Electoral Commission has not yet been called upon by the King, though, has it? So none of the Justices know whether they are part of it. I have sent a private message to the electoral commission of the previous election which in theory, remain in service for that election...
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 6, 2016 5:06:27 GMT -6
Plus, doesn't the Automatic Voting Validation Amendment need to be ratified and proclaimed? It has just been proposed by the Ziu so far. It isn't law yet.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jan 6, 2016 5:21:10 GMT -6
Plus, doesn't the Automatic Voting Validation Amendment need to be ratified and proclaimed? It has just been proposed by the Ziu so far. It isn't law yet. It does! But here is the thing... if the ballot is certified prior to the election, AND the population ratifies it, AND the King proclaims it, since the electoral commission works AFTER the election, then we can have the Electoral Commission work under the new law even if the law was ratified during the election. However, the new law says that the validation needs to occur PRIOR to the election, but nothing prevents the electoral commission from validating it even if there is no law asking for it, as far as I know. During the election itself, I will hide all of the secret votes from me and the electoral commission. If the referendum passes and the law is proclaimed, then I will never reveal them to anyone, not even me. If the referendum fails or the law isn't proclaimed, then I will reveal the secret votes to the electoral commission.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 6, 2016 5:46:52 GMT -6
During the election itself, I will hide all of the secret votes from me and the electoral commission. If the referendum passes and the law is proclaimed, then I will never reveal them to anyone, not even me. If the referendum fails or the law isn't proclaimed, then I will reveal the secret votes to the electoral commission. But...under current law, there are no official results until the electoral commission certifies them. So how can you determine whether the referendum is officially successful until after the members of the commission have validated the secret ballots?
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jan 6, 2016 6:30:43 GMT -6
During the election itself, I will hide all of the secret votes from me and the electoral commission. If the referendum passes and the law is proclaimed, then I will never reveal them to anyone, not even me. If the referendum fails or the law isn't proclaimed, then I will reveal the secret votes to the electoral commission. But...under current law, there are no official results until the electoral commission certifies them. So how can you determine whether the referendum is officially successful until after the members of the commission have validated the secret ballots? Hush... don't say that, you'll derail the whole project ;-) More seriously, if we see that the referendum passes with 90% yes, I think we can move forward. Of course, only if the electoral commission agrees, since they are judges anyway, they'll get to pick if they have to validate or not. But if we don't certify the form before the election, it's guaranteed we'll have to validate all of the votes. In the previous election, 72 of the 136 votes were secret votes using the automated ballot or 53% of all of the votes. That would have reduced drastically the amount of validation needed!
|
|
Ián Tamorán S.H.
Chief Justice of the Uppermost Court
Proud Philosopher of Talossa
Posts: 1,401
Talossan Since: 9-27-2010
|
Post by Ián Tamorán S.H. on Jan 6, 2016 9:18:46 GMT -6
There is, well, not an error - but something that will puzzle people when it happens. There is a string starting 'th Cosa election... which means that, when we get to it, we shall have the 51th Cosa Election. Hmm... a neologism. That 'bug' can wait to be fixed, though.
Insofar as I understood it, this code looks good. (I shall look at it again and post another message should I find a real error).
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Jan 6, 2016 9:23:22 GMT -6
There is, well, not an error - but something that will puzzle people when it happens. There is a string starting 'th Cosa election... which means that, when we get to it, we shall have the 51th Cosa Election. Hmm... a neologism. That 'bug' can wait to be fixed, though.
Insofar as I understood it, this code looks good. (I shall look at it again and post another message should I find a real error). You are, by far, one of my favourite Talossans.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jan 6, 2016 10:15:00 GMT -6
There is, well, not an error - but something that will puzzle people when it happens. There is a string starting 'th Cosa election... which means that, when we get to it, we shall have the 51th Cosa Election. Hmm... a neologism. That 'bug' can wait to be fixed, though.
Insofar as I understood it, this code looks good. (I shall look at it again and post another message should I find a real error). Yeah, I knew of that one... and there is a function I used for a client to auto-adjust the th, st, nd, rd... But that part of the code was from 2002. I guess I have a few months to fix it ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Jan 8, 2016 4:38:36 GMT -6
I did find somewhat of an issue this morning and fixed it.
Someone could vote on Referendums, Senate and Province without having filled a Party vote.
If that happened, then we wouldn't have a vote method, an IP address, a Useragent, and the vote wouldn't show up in the election results!
I fixed it so that the form will show again if this occurs. Check the Ballot 2.0 thread to see the code change
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Feb 9, 2016 20:14:05 GMT -6
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Feb 9, 2016 20:17:44 GMT -6
I'm not entirely certain that there is anything for us to do as the law has not been adopted into OrgLaw yet. What do my fellow justices say?
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Feb 10, 2016 4:45:45 GMT -6
I'm not entirely certain that there is anything for us to do as the law has not been adopted into OrgLaw yet. What do my fellow justices say? Here is my train of thought: 1 ) There is no law right now on the books which forbids the Secretary of State from asking the electoral commission if they agree publicly that the script he wrote for voting is secure. 2 ) Therefore, the electoral commission can decide to declare "We each individual consider the script to the secure and valid as a voting script". 3 ) This doesn't provide any actual legal benefits as currently defined in the law, BUT, it's in a way a vote of confidence that shows that all of the electoral commission agree that a certain tool they need to review is valid. It's like when I was a scrutateur (poll box director). We had to do multiple inspections before starting, just as checking the seals on the box, checking the ballot paper, checking each other's IDs, testing the pens, etc... 4 ) We do have a referendum on the ballot. This has no legal bearing today. 5 ) Once the election will be over, if the referendum passes, it would allow us to keep the automatic secret ballots well, secret! But only if we had the foretought of validating the voting script before the election. 6 ) The referendum doesn't specify a way of validating the script which is novel and original. Like I said, it uses pretty much the same method I had to use when I was a poll box director in Québec and Canadian elections: all of the people involved in the handling of a poll box inspect together the material and publicly (we sign a declaration) that we find it appropriate. As such, I affirm that we CAN validate anything as an electoral commission we WANT to at any time. My objective is three fold: A ) Speed up the review: If we once again have perhaps 55-60% of the voters who vote using the form, that's less ballots to validate! B ) Provide more privacy: all of these ballots will be truly secret. You guys won't see them, I won't them. This will be the first truly partially secret election! C ) Make the election review more honest: Be honest Txec, you have been a member of the EC before. Emailed Ballot and Wittenberg votes can be checked. We can confirm that the original vote and the vote entered in the DB are identical. But what can we check with an automated vote? IT IS the original vote! In the end, we just click "approved" next to each of them after checking to see if the IP is repeated (which will still be visible) and if we believe the user has voted (which will still be visible). In all honesty, it will take perhaps an hour to read the whole thread. But it might save use hours of validation while providing privacy to our secret voters!
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Feb 10, 2016 8:21:49 GMT -6
Even if the referendum passes, the law won't take effect until AFTER the votes are validated. That means that we can't really change how we validate from the last election until then. I like your enthusiasm, but it seems you are putting the idiomatic cart before the horse. I agree the ballot looks good, but I have no way of knowing that for sure because I can't really understand the coding.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 10, 2016 8:39:58 GMT -6
MPF, I think you might overestimate general public knowledge about computer coding. Even if you took someone line by line through the code and explained what each line was supposed to do, they probably wouldn't actually be able to understand it well enough to then certify that the code itself was perfect. You might have left out something, you might have missed a variable, or you might have just made up the code on the spot. Obviously you didn't do that and it's probably excellent code, but they'd just be taking your word for that... and the whole point of the Electoral Commission is to make sure we're not taking the Secretary of State's word on who voted and which way, as much as possible.
|
|