> -----Original Message----- Neal: I am a bit surprised at how you seem to be interpreting everything I say in a hostile way. Let's keep focused on solutions to problems, OK? I am pointing out the same problem Enrique is, the difference is that I am offering a solution. > Milton, it sounds like you are envisioning some sort of circumstance in which, > after the tally of the ballots for this election, someone would somehow intuit > what people 'really' intended and "reprocess" the results to produce a > different outcome. I can't read that as anything other than a suggestion to There is no "interpretation" involved. If a voter refuses to click the vote for candidate A, clicks the vote for candidate B and C, and then clicks NOTA, then that person is clearly voting against candidate A. If the voter refuses to click for 2 candidates, then the NOTA vote should be counted against both of them, I guess, though in these situations there is some ambiguity. If a voter refuses to support all 3 candidates and then clicks NOTA then it is unambiguously against all 3. These are algorithms. If you can explain how they change or misinterpret voter preferences I am all ears. If you can't then stop casting aspersions on what I am proposing. > make a very significant change in the election procedures and the meaning of > the ballot. It is critical for people to understand how their ballot will be > interpreted and tallied, otherwise they don't know how to vote it. If you That's exactly why I am discussing this now. What you seem to have lost sight of is that the results of a straight count of NOTA votes can lead to the defeat of candidates who were supported by a majority of the voters. > Using phrases like "each of the 3 candidates generates a 30% NOTA vote" is > the wrong way to characterize how people should approach this ballot as it is. No, it isn't. > And it also seems highly unlikely under the current circumstances, and not > worthy of concern. Maybe. What evidence are you basing your judgement on? I would say a 30% no vote for a specific candidate is not unlikely at all. Whether that occurs for all 3 is less likely, but we don't know. And we have to be prepared. > I hope we can all just accept the recently agreed-on election procedure, and > that we just leave the ballots and the tally procedures as they have been > clearly stated a number of times now. Both Enrique and I have shown how this can lead to anomalous results that do not reflect the intentions of the voters. To repeata: the results of a straight count of NOTA votes can lead to the defeat of candidates who were supported by a majority of the voters. It's kind of odd for you to praise Enrique's statements and ignore what he is saying at the same time.