|
Post by memoryfault on May 5, 2022 10:08:48 GMT 8
"And the second to last gets nothing once the preferences flow to the first over 50% correct?"
No Struth.
Once again you are looking at it completely arse about face. It is entirely possible for the person you number second to last to end up winning the election, and your vote could be crucial in that win. Counting goes on until one candidate gets 50% +1 of the votes cast. A candidate could get 50% +1 of the votes on the first preference count, in which case it doesn't matter how people numbered their preferences. That has happened. It could also happen that it could take the distribution of ALL preferences to arrive at a winner. Consider two real life examples:
In the last QLD state election in the seat Peter Campion contested, Mark Knuth (KAP) got 48% of the first preference votes. Mark only needed a handful of second preference votes to take him over the line. Conversely, in the Super Saturday by-elections in 2018 there was one seat in SA where 17 candidates nominated. Despite the number of candidates it came down to Liberal versus Labor, and Labor won by a mere handful of votes - about 200. In that case EVERY preference vote down to the level of second-last, would have counted.
Obviously around a hundred people more numbered the Liberal candidate last than numbered the Labor candidate last. If that choice had been reversed, by just 100 or so people, the result would have been reversed and the Liberals would have won (not that it would make any difference - they're all crooks).
The moral of the story is this - you can vote FOR whoever you like, you really have no idea or control over who is going to win. You are only expressing a hope. However, you have absolute control over one result of your vote - the person you number LAST WILL NOT and CANNOT benefit from your vote.
|
|
|
Post by NFA on May 5, 2022 12:58:07 GMT 8
I lived in Cairns for 12 months leaving in August 2013.
Imagine my surprise on receiving an email from the Queensland Office of The Australian Electoral Commission just prior to the 2020 Queensland State Elections telling me, for the first time, that I owed 'yay whatever' fines for not voting in whatever elections had been held since August 2013.
Not only that but they helpfully provided me with a barcode type symbol that I merely had to print off and have it scanned to prove my identity when I presented myself at a polling booth!
How I ended up on the Queensland Electoral Roll is beyond me but presumably having dealings with Qld State Government Departments may have triggered an automatic registration... who knows!
I soon sorted it with them and they magnanimously wiped all prior failure to vote fines!
However, it was and is pretty alarming to think that a mass of 'bar code type' symbols could have been generated for any back packer, tourist or whomever.
And Struth has been crying out that a Chinese mob supplied and operated equipment for the Qld AEC and has been told he's wrong.
I checked his original posts from over at the sinc/dover cat and perhaps other folk should check as well.
|
|
|
Post by memoryfault on May 5, 2022 13:49:56 GMT 8
"And Struth has been crying out that a Chinese mob supplied and operated equipment for the Qld AEC"
No. Not here he hasn't.
What Struth claimed in a post about federal election voting was that people now (present tense) voted on Chinese voting machines and the results fed into Chinese computers. Neither statement is true.
For the moment all federal and state voting in Australia is by hand on paper ballot papers. Votes made in person at polling stations on election day are subject to total scrutiny from the moment the ballot boxes are opened soon after 6.00pm, until at least all first preference votes are counted, and in most cases right through until all preferences are allocated.
The votes are then bundled, recorded, and packed in cartons which are sealed, again all under the eye of scrutineers. Any candidate in an election can nominate scrutineers, and scrutineers can challenge both the interpretation of any particular vote, and the total votes counted as recorded, at any time.
Where loopholes may exist in the scrutiny process is in postal and pre-poll voting. I have never been involved in these, so I have no idea what systems are in place. However, even in those cases the votes are ultimately recorded on paper, and those paper ballots are retained. Also of concern is the new rule that people under Covid isolation can vote by phone, but again, I have no knowledge of what checks and balances are in the process, so I can't comment.
What Struth referred to was a mob who tried to sell a Chinese computerised voting system to the QLD government, who were dead keen on the idea (I wonder why). Unfortunately (for them and the QLD govt) the system failed dismally in its test run, so for the time being it is on the back burner. The test run was a dummy run, and did not involve actual counting in an actual election in the process of being conducted.
So yes, such computerised systems are a concern, but no, for the moment they are not in use here in Australia as claimed by Struth.
|
|
|
Post by Struth on May 5, 2022 15:23:03 GMT 8
Who needs computers anyway, look at this fucking process.....nothing to see here.I said that there were reports that the Queensland government were using Chinese machines and Chinese programs back at the state election that I could neither confirm or deny. How do you know what's going on behind the scenes MV? I mean you're not a computer geek...you still think you need 25 grand for a web site. So tell us how you know what you know, and also how you are sure computers aren't being used when the government tells us they are going to be used. They have them for low viz people at booths etc. This is going to be a sham.
|
|
|
Post by NFA on May 5, 2022 15:40:55 GMT 8
"And Struth has been crying out that a Chinese mob supplied and operated equipment for the Qld AEC" No. Not here he hasn't. Totally agree.
But you did not give my full statement as above,
After my startling email from Qld AEC, and I actually forwarded it to a candidate in those elections, and seeing Struth's claim of Chinese machines I did look.
|
|
|
Post by memoryfault on May 5, 2022 16:37:28 GMT 8
Struth,
You have a nasty, even vicious habit of turning civilised debate into a personal attack when it's not going your way.
I have been trying to explain to you the difference between numbering a candidate LAST, and just numbering a candidate a bit down on the ballot paper as promoted by PML. Now you don't want to discuss that anymore, so be it. We'll stick with the new "alternative" subjects that you have introduced to change the subject. We can return to the effect of just numbering the incumbent member " a bit down" after the election, when the ruling Liberal/Labor/National junta is returned with a comfortable majority, and quite possibly with a Labor government.
First, phone voting. I never denied it, I said I didn't know anything about how it was going to be conducted, and it was worrying. ---------------------------------------
Second, Chinese computer voting. Here is what you wrote, copy and pasted from upthread:
"We have voting machines. Chinese programmed, Chinese operated voting Machines. We have paper ballots that get counted and the results punched into a computer." --------------------------------------
Third, the websites I set up:
"I mean you're not a computer geek...you still think you need 25 grand for a web site."
Actually Struth, I am something of a "computer geek". But that is another story, and something I have never mentioned to any degree online. And I didn't spend "25 grand for a website". I spent $20,000 on legal and accounting costs because unlike you I have been down this road before with the newsletter, and I know just how nasty the authorities can be when you upset their apple cart. Cast your mind back to when Clive Palmer first started promoting Craig Kelly and the UAP. Quick as a flash they were threatened with prosecution for breach of copyright of a government website!
I was holding off on publishing the websites until they enacted the Cash Restrictions Act. I explained that many, many times to fend off attacks from Leigh Lowe. I never thought I would have to defend myself against the very same vicious attacks from someone who I thought was an ally, but there you have it. Now we know.
As it turns out, it was all pointless. The Online Safety Act creates a neat run-around any kind of legal defence. So yes, it was all money down the drain. ----------------------------------
Finally -
"So tell us how you know what you know, and also how you are sure computers aren't being used . . ."
I know computers aren't used in the primary count process because, again unlike you, I have scrutineered at polling booths on election day several times, including at the last federal election. ---------------------------
As far as I am concerned that ends this conversation.
I'm not the least bit interested in continuing a stupid spat about matters utterly irrelevant to the original subject mater, which was the importance of placing the sitting member last. I can only hope that at least some readers understand the difference between 'last" and anywhere else, despite your best efforts to muddy the waters, for reasons that can only be guessed at.
Those waiting for elections to save us do not get what they are up against and by the time they do, it will be too late.
|
|
|
Post by Struth on May 5, 2022 22:31:16 GMT 8
Personal attack? I thought I was being nice. Don't get straight talk confused with personal attack, or try that bullshit on, we know you are no shrinking violet. How do you know computers aren't being used this election? It's a simple enough question.
Not all things stay the same. Not when criminals vcan use technology. All of what we are now going through is because technology now exists that evil can use that didn't back in your day.
I just want to know how you know computers aren't being used this time.
|
|
|
Post by Struth on May 6, 2022 11:05:18 GMT 8
|
|
|
Post by NFA on May 13, 2022 20:22:39 GMT 8
|
|