View Full Version : Who needs new technology with elections?
I'm not totally against new technology with elections but isn't it a bit farsical(sp) that fingers and thumbs would have been faster than bytes and kilobytes this time round?[lol]
I'm twiddling my thumbs now and waiting for the results of the election!!:)
Bill Fernie
04-May-07, 00:57
Speaking as a candidate the set up is much worse than in the past for us in Caithness. Whereas we used to get the count manually in Assembly Rooms, Wick we now have to travel to Inverness to see machines do the count and for the council it does not even start until 10.00am assuming there are no big glitches with the Scottish Parliement highlands and Islands counts running first.
As there are already problems with the boxes from Barra holding up the List MSP count until 12.00 Noon that may hit the council count - we do not know as yet and proabaly will not until we arrive in Inverness. all of the candidates from Caithness and every other county nowhave to go to Inverness purely so they can use the machines to do the count electronically. Yes it is quicker to do the count once it gets going but the results will mainly be later than before - hardly progress.
For the council count it is anticipated that over 600 people may make the trip to Inverness. Personally I feel that this is a big loss for Caithness losing the direct connection for all concerned in the election locally.
It also means that I cannot put the results n the web site as I have in the past elections since we began the web site. Ihave placed links on the front page where the results might be found later on.
I'm miffed that I didn't get to vote. If I could have text in my selection like Big Brother then I could have done it. I got someone else that didn't want to vote themselves to go and give my choice so at least I feel like I got my say. Just as well it doesn't take place in the winter then with all the too ing and fro ing to Inverness, in this day and age.
We might have all the fancy technology......... but can never write of plain bad luck for putting a spanner in the works !!! if i heard right helicopter cant fly due to fog and a boat has broken down carrying ballot boxes [smirk] and then some nutter goes beserk and smashes up a voting station with a golf club !!:) you could'nt make it up !!
The big discussion going on at the moment is the excessive increase in the numbers of "Rejected" ballot papers.
These are not ballot papers deliberately "Spoiled" by voters as a deliberate act but caused by confusion amongst voters because of the different voting systems being used at the same time.
The fact that the count for local Councillors is now done in that far off place about which we know little and care even less is yet another example of Caithness and similar areas being sidelined as a necessary inconvenience but of little consequence.
These rejected papers are making me extremely dubious about the result.
I hear on the radio for instance that in one constituency where the previous year there were 50 rejected papers this year there were over 1000.
It's a complex poll compared with all the years before it but it's not rocket science. I have low confidence in the accuracy of the overall poll given the vast numbers of rejected papers.
Gogglebox
04-May-07, 06:23
Well after all the weeks of listening to party political drivel at 6am we are still no further on
Its a national embarrassment. Press from all over the world have been looking at this election and the outcome heading possibly to breaking up the Union, now the story is Scottish Incompetence.
This was supposed to have been trialled and tested
The rejected papers are being put down to people mixing up the voting system
They are predicting now OVER 100,000 spoiled ballot papers for the National Election
Imagine how many Council ones got crosses instead of numbers, these votes are so fine in a lot of cases that the electorates voting wishes and intention may not be followed through. Wheres the true democracy
A disgrace and one which will undermine the integrity and the mandate of the winning party if its as close as we are led to believe
Little wonder over 40% dont seem to have bothered to vote
If the level of uncertainty about voting intentions were of the kind of level it now is in Scotland in a country such as Nigeria then independent election monitors would declare the result to be dubious at best.
Where the number of rejected ballot papers exceeds that of the majority (the difference between the two highest voted parties), assuming we do nothing more than make casual mention about the travesty of missing postal votes, the result IMO does NOT reflect the will of the people. The electorate has been cheated out of its votes.
The sheer volume of rejected ballot papers (votes from people who bothered themselves to turn up but whose votes has not been accepted) calls whole constituencies in this election into question.
Gogglebox
04-May-07, 08:52
If the level of uncertainty about voting intentions were of the kind of level it now is in Scotland in a country such as Nigeria then independent election monitors would declare the result to be dubious at best.
Where the number of rejected ballot papers exceeds that of the majority (the difference between the two highest voted parties), assuming we do nothing more than make casual mention about the travesty of missing postal votes, the result IMO does NOT reflect the will of the people. The electorate has been cheated out of its votes.
The sheer volume of rejected ballot papers (votes from people who bothered themselves to turn up but whose votes has not been accepted) calls whole constituencies in this election into question.
I agree, Its just a farce now
The other point other than the constiuency vote is that the 100000 "spoilt"votes could alter the list vote quite significantly and now the representation of the actual vote can not be ascertained as correct in any way at all
As much as i would hate to have to go through another 4 weeks of being pesterd by politicians i would run it again - - but who would come out and vote? But how many times over the period of the parliament will this discredited vote be cast up
They are predicting minority government now as not even a coalition would not give enough to have a majority to enact legislation
Also as an aside - If all the partys in a minority parliament cannot agree a First Minister within 28 days the election has to be run again!!!
Something to look forward to!! lol
There should be no excuse to botching up a ballot paper, really, there were several full page spreads in national newspapers explaining it all this week. Not to mention the several posters in the polling stations, the explanations at the top of the ballot paper and the helpful advice from the election officers.:roll:
It wasn't exactly rocket science...:roll:
Speaking as a candidate the set up is much worse than in the past for us in Caithness. Whereas we used to get the count manually in Assembly Rooms, Wick we now have to travel to Inverness to see machines do the count and for the council it does not even start until 10.00am assuming there are no big glitches with the Scottish Parliement highlands and Islands counts running first.
As there are already problems with the boxes from Barra holding up the List MSP count until 12.00 Noon that may hit the council count - we do not know as yet and proabaly will not until we arrive in Inverness. all of the candidates from Caithness and every other county nowhave to go to Inverness purely so they can use the machines to do the count electronically. Yes it is quicker to do the count once it gets going but the results will mainly be later than before - hardly progress.
For the council count it is anticipated that over 600 people may make the trip to Inverness. Personally I feel that this is a big loss for Caithness losing the direct connection for all concerned in the election locally.
It also means that I cannot put the results n the web site as I have in the past elections since we began the web site. Ihave placed links on the front page where the results might be found later on.
And there is, of course, the environmental issue associated with taking all those people by cars or whatever form of transport a round trip of 220 miles to watch machines gobble up paper. A lot more paper than previously - more trees gone!!
There should be no excuse to botching up a ballot paper, really, there were several full page spreads in national newspapers explaining it all this week. Not to mention the several posters in the polling stations, the explanations at the top of the ballot paper and the helpful advice from the election officers.:roll:
It wasn't exactly rocket science...:roll:
I'm only half way with you on that, the more I think about it. Some old folks really do struggle with some of these things (some of them of course are a sharp as a new pin) and there's no denying it wasn't complicated, not least because of squeezing two ballots onto a single paper, plus a third paper using a completely different system of voting.
I personally don't buy a newspaper and don't have a TV. All the same, because it interests me I went to the election website weeks before the election and read explanations there it so I knew what to expect before I went to the polls.
Out here in the sticks there was no note as to which way up to put the papers into the box (although I'm not sure if that matters) and I looked over to the ladies in the hall who said 'yes, that's right' when I inquired about putting mine in face up.
From what I can gather the new technology worked well in most places and very badly in a few areas. I think it's beginning to look like the real problem was the layout of the ballot paper and mixing two systems of voting together.
I'm only half way with you on that, the more I think about it. Some old folks really do struggle with some of these things (some of them of course are a sharp as a new pin) and there's no denying it wasn't complicated, not least because of squeezing two ballots onto a single paper, plus a third paper using a completely different system of voting.
From what I can gather the new technology worked well in most places and very badly in a few areas. I think it's beginning to look like the real problem was the layout of the ballot paper and mixing two systems of voting together.
I agree with you emb123 - but I don't think it applies only to "old folk". ;)
The BBC website shows comments suggesting that if you can't manage to work out the voting system, you're not sufficiently compos mentis to vote!
No, it's not rocket science. However, the combination of the two MSP ballots on one paper with the new system of voting for councillors has confused many people.
I voted by post. In my case the confusion was compounded by being sent out (late) the correct parliamentary ballot papers, but the wrong council ballot papers -for a different ward! The following day the correct council ballot papers arrived with a long spiel from the "Retuning Officer" (couldn't even get the spelling right it seems) telling me what to do next...by then I had 2 correct papers, 1 wrong paper, 6 assorted envelopes and a great deal of other stuff in front of me...
I am curious as to what happened if someone chose to vote for a constituency MSP but not to vote on the regional list -or vice versa. Would the system flag this up as a spoiled paper?
I think it would have been better to introduce and evaluate one change at a time.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.