h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Paully I have started a separate thread on this issue here:-

F2045034?thread=622152&post=6855532#p6855532

just to give you a heads up ok?

I don't think a ruined ballot registers you as a non-participant, since ruined ballots are reported seperately to people who simply didn't show up (i.e. didn't participant) so there is a difference between them.

Certainly it won't have any influence on who gets in, but if thats your basis surely a vote for anyone who doesn't win is a wasted vote (and a vote for anyone who wasn't likely to win was a wasted vote that the user knew they were wasting) I don't agree with that, and I don't think any of the numerous members of parties other than the main three agree either (along with the large portion of lib dem candidates who aren't getting anywhere)

Of course support for an idea doesn't make it right, just popular :P

"Runining a paper is extremely important. It is the difference between someone who thought the polling station was a long way to walk and someone who wanted to say that the whole systems a mess and they can't bring themself to vote for anyone."

Nobody cares about spoiled papers, though. It's a way of registering a non-opinion, it counts for nothing. You can write what the hell you want on the paper but no one who cares is ever going to see it. People who count the votes probably see 'NO TO EUROPE FREE UK' or 'COMMUNISM NOW' and no doubt all sorts of rubbish on spoiled papers all the time and they just go on the 'spoiled papers' pile. Has anyone ever seen a constiutency count on the TV and after the results the announcer add 'Oh, by the way, there were loads of spoiled papers protesting the state of the local hospital so well done guys - your voice counted even if your vote couldn't!'? No. And there will never be such a thing because the whole point of ignoring spoiled papers is so that people can't use them to voice concerns. And the idea that if 'enough people' spoil their papers they'll make a point is futile.

Here's an idea - if anyone wants to spoil a paper because they feel there's 'no choice' (and in a country where we have conservatives, liberals, socialists, greens, isolationists, monster-raving-loonies and fascists as choices I'd have to ask what you *do* want) why the hell don't you start a new movement? If you genuinely feel you represent a broad tide of dissent then you've double the reason. Hell, that's what UKIP did and it netted them quite a few Euro MP seats and might still net them a seat or two at Westminster.

I've only ever seen one campaign encouraging people to spoil papers and it was effectively little more than someone in a huff asking people to join him.

Greetings Ferretbadger,

I am not sure that you understand my original point. If we are not to regard other areas of the BBC on a similar basis, why was it neccesary to prevent people from discussing the election with the boards they normally subscribe to.

I am happy for you that you feel this appears to be a new freedom to you on this board. I am similarily pleased that I have made new acquaintances by coming to this board. I have as yet little experience of 'the italics' as you refer to them on this board and am not making opinion about them. I am simply expressing an opinion about election coverage whihc means that I have been shunted off another board and obliged to express that on this board. A simple explanation that makes sense of it, is all I ask.

However, I am not going to say anything further about it for fear of becoming a bore.

Regards SGG.

Recumbentman: What if no Raving Loonies stand in my area?

The studio announcer may not mention the number of spoilt ballot papers, but the returning officer usually does, as part of the declaration of the result of the poll. Candidates, agents and parties are certainly interested in them - there is considerable anorakism regarding figures at the count - and each one will be looked at carefully, just in case it might actually be a vote that could be counted. So, the media might not be interested on the night (although I bet they would be in the general wash-up afterwards, if the spoilt ballot papers figure was high enough), but the people being elected would be.

The thought of a vote-counting machine for multi-seat constituencies is *very* appealing. Those ballot papers are an absolute b*gger to count manually and a recount doesn't bear thinking about. Not very exciting though, lots of machines eating paper - rather noisy, and it would ruin the atmosphere of anticipation, people darting about trying to work out which pile looks bigger on which table. I like sitting down on one side of a table and being watched like a hawk by candidates and agents opposite me. But if you'd rather watch me feeding papers into machines and unblocking the paper jams, I'm up for it.

I really can't see how e-voting could be secure, verifiable, and trusted by electors, however. Ballot papers are complicated as it is (believe it or not) in terms of issue and verification, but it's fairly obvious that the ballot (a) is secret and (b) can be counted openly.

Mol

What if no Raving Loonies stand in my area? Join the party and stand yourself. Now that could be fun.

Paper jams could be reduced by making the voting papers of stiff card, quite small; don't fold them, just pop them in with the written side hidden. Folding would count as spoiling, if you really want to.

I have a funny feeling that my professional impartiality as an administrator of the electoral process *might* be called into question if I were to stand as a Monster Raving Looney candidate (or indeed for any other party). Ah, the sacrifices I make to ensure the continued safe operation of the democratic process.

I am absolutely certain that a machine counting 45,000 pieces of paper (or card) will jam at least once during the course of the job.

Mol

End of the world? Hardly.

No, of course not the end of the world. Indeed, it would bring a little excitement to the proceedings. But I've got a job to protect here, you know

Mol