andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2010-08-11 02:07 pm

Stupid idea of the day

If voting took place over a couple of days, with counting going on simultaneously, and the results available in real time, then this would encourage more people to participate as time went on, if they saw that the result was close, and thus their vote mattered.

Has this ever been tried, and if so, what appalling side-effects did it have?
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-08-11 02:42 pm (UTC)(link)
an election count can be tallied by hand in 2-6 hours by a bunch of volunteers, overseen by candidates and their election agents

Not volunteers, the counting staff get paid.

Election agents don't though, even when we're there all night and the result isn't called until 8am because the idiot in charge didn't oganise the collection of boxes properly.