<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 10:02 AM, spike <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:spike66@att.net" target="_blank">spike66@att.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"></span><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">>… Behalf Of </span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Adrian Tymes<span class=""><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] Cosmopolitanism, collective epistemology and other issues<u></u><u></u></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><div><div><div>>…Or they can hold a second referendum to "confirm Brexit", perhaps citing "irregularities in the vote" (and marking Secret that the "irregularities" are actually the post-election backtrackings…<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> <br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Do the British have online non-paper machine voting?  If so, they can make it come out any way they want, the way we do here.</span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>From what I hear, their votes are all paper.  Doesn't prevent unspecified "irregularities" from being cited, though.  (Forged ballots are a thing, and if there was a legitimate technical problem there would be a strong case for Secret marking...though also a strong case against.) <br></div></div></div></div>