Spoiling your vote for Nice?

DeadBankClerk

[14:33] <LeadMagnet> SPOIL YOUR VOTE ON THE GROUNDS THAT NICE IS A STUPID NAME FOR A TREATY
[14:34] <DeadBankClerk> i cant it electronic voting in my constituancy (sp?)
[14:34] <LeadMagnet> you can't purposely spoil your vote?
[14:34] <LeadMagnet> that sucks
[14:35] <DeadBankClerk> i know
[14:35] <DeadBankClerk> they need a third button
[14:35] <DeadBankClerk> "ATARI JAGUAR"
[14:35] <LeadMagnet> yeah



What do you guys think? Should there be a 'Spoil Vote' button, or is spoiling a vote a flaw in the system caused by paper ballot, which has been remedied by the new electronic system?


- If spoilt votes get more than 50% the ballot could be rejected and a new one should be drawn up?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Meh

Originally posted by daveirl
if a certain percentage [let's say 20%] cast a blank ballot the election/referendum should have to be run again.

That would be open to abuse. It would mean that a minority could veto any referendum. From a No voter's point of view, it would be better to spoil their vote than to vote no.

DadaKopf

Include a none of the above/rehold referendum option.

Frank Grimes

There should be a none of the above option or something similar, I think.
People should have the ability to register their vote, regardless of what they do with it. It's better than not showing up at all.

swiss

Added a missing third option, hope you don't mind DBC

I've always thought of a spoiled vote as a wasted vote. There are hundreds of reasons why a voter does may not want to vote on a particular issue, or it could be just chalked down to carelessness (such as the whole 'dimpled chad' fiasco in the states).

It sends out a signal "I'm not happy about this referendum, but I'm not going to say why". Since a spoiled vote is rejected whether it says "Bertie is a [insert expletive]" or "Nice is a load of [insert expletive]", there is no change effected by spoling a vote. It is, IMO a waste of a voice.

m1ke

in this sort of referendum there should be no need to spoil a vote really, it's just pointless waste of a 10 min walk to the polling station.

If it's in a general election though, and you're looking at the ballot paper and not one candidate appeals to you.... then that's diff i suppose

bonkey

Some of the arguments raised recently have me seriously rethinking whether or not there is a different message being sent by not voting and spoiling a vote.

I accept Swiss' comment about how meaningless a spoiled vote can be in terms of profanities by idiots, or just plain imperfection causing invalidation.

However, I also think that there is a significant number of spoiled votes which are intended to send a message.

I also am considering it more and more probable that the political parties have enough will and power to be able to get at least some information as to what the nature of spoiled votes were. Whether its cronies saying "most o' wot I read, boss, sed dis....", or actual detailed statistical analysis, I couldnt say, but I do believe they are interested and informed about spoiled vote "messages".

After all, its incredibly cheap as honest market research. You get genuine anonymity (they dont care who said what), but you also get complete honesty. When's the last time you knew someone who "lied" in an election for the crack? On the other hand, you've probably told a fib or two yourself in some market research project at some point or another. I know I have - it got me a second free beer.

If we accept this premise, then under the paper-based system, there is a valid reason to spoil your vote.

On the other hand, I'm beginning to think that a "none of the above" or similar Atari Jaguar button in electronic format would provide far less market research, and would therefore not be effective in sending a message to anyone, other then general discontentment with something in the establishment.

Its better than nothing, but only barely. Unlike a paper-based spoiled vote, it has about a 0% chance of being interpreted differently to other spoiled votes...of being understood as the message you wanted to send.

Which leaves the question of whether or not it should be there wide open for me. And I thougth I knew where I stood only a few days ago.

Of course, I'm also still trying to decide whether or not I approve of the possible/probable situation whereby political parties have access to information about the actual ballot papers, or the papers themselves.

It makes a spoiled "message" worthwhile, but its still a bit dirty.

Bah. Too much thinking. Back to movie and drink.

I'd welcome any thoughts. I'm not looking for argument or insult. Just thoughts.

Cheers. Mines a large one.

jc

Firefox

Why anybody would want to spoil their vote is beyond me. I think it's a discrace that sombody would actually go out to delibrately spoil and abuse a right that so many millons of people on this planet will never be able to do.

sceptre

Originally posted by Firefox
Why anybody would want to spoil their vote is beyond me. I think it's a discrace that sombody would actually go out to delibrately spoil and abuse a right that so many millons of people on this planet will never be able to do.

Ah but you have to remember that they have a right to vote, not a duty. Where some people feel there's no candidate on the ballot that they are willing to vote for, but they do wish to vote, they may feel that the best thing is to send such a message signifying this. You could say something like "if no candidate suits you you should run yourself" but some people may feel unrepresented without wishing to stand themselves (not everyone who's interested in politics actually wants to become a TD).

With regard to the last Nice vote, quite a few people felt uninformed - some of them chose to point this out by turning up to the polling station and spoiling their vote (I know a few people who did this).

wolf359

Say for arguments sake that there is a referendum, and in my constituency there are only to two candidates, FF & FG for example. And if I do not agree with their policies, with electronic voting I have to vote one or the other. It’s my right as an Irish citizen to vote, so I will vote. But the only option I have is to spoil my vote. To show the above parties that I do not believe in their policies

Regardless of how you see it there is no right or wrong vote, it’s the person’s vote.
So whether it’s a Yes, No or Spoilt Vote, there all valid.

Moriarty

Just to let you know, you can still spoil your vote using the electronic stations. Clearly some people havent being paying attention..

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

Originally posted by daveirl
Really? How?

They mentioned it on the news the other night. Fail to press the "cast vote" button or something and the nice man will have to press the "idiot failed to press the 'cast vote' button", thereby registering your vote as spoiled. Places trust in the person at the station though rather than taking the bull by the horns yourself.

bonkey

Originally posted by sceptre
They mentioned it on the news the other night. Fail to press the "cast vote" button or something and the nice man will have to press the "idiot failed to press the 'cast vote' button", thereby registering your vote as spoiled. Places trust in the person at the station though rather than taking the bull by the horns yourself.

Some years ago, I remember there being a reasonably-well publicised fact along the lines of "Dustin won x% of the vote for such-n-such in this constituency. Had he been an official candidate, this would have given him election".

Now, unless this was complete urban legend, what it means is that in the current format, someone is looking to see why votes were spoiled. This is why it makes it potentially useful - you actually can send a message. If enough people send the same message, you can be pretty sure the intended recipient will hear of it.

With electronic voting, the best you can do is spoil your vote for an unknown reason.

Interestingly, here in Switzerland, a spoiled vote is thrown in the bin, and later on, shredded and burned. It is not analysed or counted in any way - it is considered to be the same as not voting.

Having said that, in the upcoming local elections, you get a ballot paper for each candidate, as well as one with a blank name you can fill in yourself. It is possible for a non-candidate to get elected, if enough people vote for him/her

jc

Turner

Originally posted by bonkey

Now, unless this was complete urban legend, what it means is that in the current format, someone is looking to see why votes were spoiled. This is why it makes it potentially useful - you actually can send a message. If enough people send the same message, you can be pretty sure the intended recipient will hear of it.


jc

nah when polititions hear of spoilt votes they think of cappers who write yes in all the box's, write no in the yes box, tick the two box's, put a yes and a no in the yes and the no box, and if the ballot paper has no seal on it.

I worked at a count today and there was about 200 spoiled votes, 3-4 said f3ck the government or what ever, 1 had a pre printed letter stuck to it and the rest were just fools who didnt know how to tick a box properly.