Re: Ending votes early
Branden Robinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 03:10:56AM -0400, email@example.com wrote:
> > > > I've always taken it to mean "ignoring the slight possibility that
> > > > people who have voted didn't mean what they said".
> > On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 08:02:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > > I am not sure that the possibility is slight, really.
> > Oh? In the elections you have details on, roughly how many ballots
> > (out of how many total) got changed?
> Here, I've got an anecdote that will scare you straight.
> It's my understanding that if the 2003 DPL election had been terminated
> 48 hours early (without advance warning), I would be your DPL today.
Yeah, but probably because a buch of new votes came in late. Not
because people changed their vote. The proposal was for when a high
majority of votes are already cast early, right?
> There. That ought to get everyone on board for Manoj's proposal. :)
Not really. I voted for you. :-)