[ExI] elections again; was [Time Magazine: Person of the Year: Putin(!),my vote instead:Anna Politkovskaja]
mail at harveynewstrom.com
Fri Dec 28 06:01:10 UTC 2007
On Thursday 27 December 2007 20:43, spike wrote:
> Thanks J. Andrew, this I cheerfully recognize. There is a lot of game
> theory involved in national elections. Paradoxes abound. For instance
> assume there are elections between mauves and taupes. Assume a person is
> mauve to the core. She realizes her choice in the primaries appears safe
> (or hopelessly lost, either way.) Game theory suggests she should register
> as a taupe, then vote for the least electable candidate of the bunch.
Pretending to register for a party that one doesn't really believe in, and
then sabotaging the other party's vote is dishonest (or misleading at best).
I belive most voters would refuse to do this on moral grounds. There is no
paradox why most people don't use game theory to elect leaders. The
elections are not a game. They are intended to poll the opinion of the
Using the system to do anything other than represent one's opinion violates
the principal of the thing, and may even be illegal. I expect a good lawyer
could argue that this practice constituted fraud and election tampering.
Registering as a member of a party to sabotage it rather than support it
might be considered fraud. If a number of people agreed to do this plan, it
might be considered conspiracy. I don't know how the election ballots are
exactly worded, but voting for someone not your own choice but to disrupt the
system could be a violation of what one signs and submits during the process.
Clearly, the intent is to disrupt the true polling of the party's opinions,
so on the basis of intent alone, it would be attempted election tampering.
Harvey Newstrom <www.harveynewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CIFI GSEC IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP
More information about the extropy-chat