| 1 |
Am Donnerstag, 17. Juli 2014, 13:49:38 schrieb hasufell: |
| 2 |
> Dirkjan Ochtman: |
| 3 |
> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:38 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> Doesn't that make the vote invalid? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > I don't see why it would. Maybe if voters would have known in advance |
| 7 |
> > that their votes might be compromised. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> IMO, it doesn't matter if the violation had an effect on the result. It |
| 10 |
> matters that there was a violation of procedure. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Sure it was a violation of procedure. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Problem is, *if* we re-vote, then knowledge about the first vote enters the |
| 15 |
decision. Which is a very tricky thing and can easily be argued to make the |
| 16 |
hypothetical re-vote invalid in itself. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Unfortunate as the situation is, at least the voters' decision was not |
| 19 |
influenced by the later publication of votes. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 23 |
Gentoo Linux developer (council, kde) |
| 24 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 25 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
Archives