<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Write-ins and Lizard People</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/</link>
	<description>Deep thoughts and cheap shots</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:10:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Harvey</title>
		<link>http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/comment-page-1/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>Harvey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:44:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/?p=129#comment-232</guid>
		<description>Cynic, while I can&#039;t think of any specific examples of selling votes for cash, non-identifiable ballots are very important to prevent transactions of the form &quot;I vote for you and write in Lizard People for the next race, in exchange for getting to keep both of my legs&quot;. We&#039;re lucky that in the US the positive feedback of (relatively) clean and trustworthy elections means we&#039;re not as worried about secret ballot compromises, but it took many reforms to get us to this point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cynic, while I can&#8217;t think of any specific examples of selling votes for cash, non-identifiable ballots are very important to prevent transactions of the form &#8220;I vote for you and write in Lizard People for the next race, in exchange for getting to keep both of my legs&#8221;. We&#8217;re lucky that in the US the positive feedback of (relatively) clean and trustworthy elections means we&#8217;re not as worried about secret ballot compromises, but it took many reforms to get us to this point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aerion</title>
		<link>http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/comment-page-1/#comment-228</link>
		<dc:creator>Aerion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 17:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/?p=129#comment-228</guid>
		<description>OK, I&#039;ll elaborate a little more, now that I&#039;m actually out of bed. (Well, I&#039;m still sitting on the bed. But I have moved in the meantime, and I think that for Christmas &lt;s&gt;morning&lt;/s&gt; afternoon, that&#039;s not a bad accomplishment.)

The identifying-mark law is aimed at preventing vote-selling that may or may not occur. This is the same way. In addition, the goal is to avoid debates over whether or not a write-in is an identifying mark; such debates were a, if not &lt;i&gt;the&lt;/i&gt;, main source of challenges during the MN-Sen recount. (I watched way too much of the feed at &lt;a href=&quot;http://theuptake.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Uptake&lt;/a&gt;.)

Most of the challenges were rejected (the votes were counted). That&#039;s my preferred outcome---I&#039;d rather err on the side of counting votes---but it does open the window for a potential vote-seller to use the write-in attack, knowing that there is solid precedent that would ensure the ballot is still accepted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, I&#8217;ll elaborate a little more, now that I&#8217;m actually out of bed. (Well, I&#8217;m still sitting on the bed. But I have moved in the meantime, and I think that for Christmas <s>morning</s> afternoon, that&#8217;s not a bad accomplishment.)</p>
<p>The identifying-mark law is aimed at preventing vote-selling that may or may not occur. This is the same way. In addition, the goal is to avoid debates over whether or not a write-in is an identifying mark; such debates were a, if not <i>the</i>, main source of challenges during the MN-Sen recount. (I watched way too much of the feed at <a href="http://theuptake.com/" rel="nofollow">The Uptake</a>.)</p>
<p>Most of the challenges were rejected (the votes were counted). That&#8217;s my preferred outcome&#8212;I&#8217;d rather err on the side of counting votes&#8212;but it does open the window for a potential vote-seller to use the write-in attack, knowing that there is solid precedent that would ensure the ballot is still accepted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aerion</title>
		<link>http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/comment-page-1/#comment-224</link>
		<dc:creator>Aerion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 17:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/?p=129#comment-224</guid>
		<description>No, and I don&#039;t have to have an example. This is a post about theory.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, and I don&#8217;t have to have an example. This is a post about theory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cynic</title>
		<link>http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/2008/12/24/write-ins-and-lizard-people/comment-page-1/#comment-219</link>
		<dc:creator>Cynic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2008 12:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aggressivelyuninformed.com/?p=129#comment-219</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s nice, in theory. But do you have any actual examples of someone selling their vote?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s nice, in theory. But do you have any actual examples of someone selling their vote?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

