Re: The Thunderer reveals a criminal conspiracy!

fred2 said:

My wife complained that she couldn't vote, since I already beat her to the
landline. However peace was restored when I offered my computer link! Does
that mean I abused the system and what about my children's opinion ? Should
they be disenfranchised?
Fred

I don't think so, Webster may have got it wrong again:

Voting arrangements:

The following arrangements for voting have been agreed by Big Lottery
Fund and ITV with guidance from Electoral Reform Services.
Only one vote per recognised telephone number or email address will be
allowed.

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/pr_261107_uk_llpm_online_voting_begins?regioncode=-ni

spindrift said:

fred2 said:

My wife complained that she couldn't vote, since I already beat her to the
landline. However peace was restored when I offered my computer link! Does
that mean I abused the system and what about my children's opinion ? Should
they be disenfranchised?
Fred

I don't think so, Webster may have got it wrong again:

Voting arrangements:

The following arrangements for voting have been agreed by Big Lottery
Fund and ITV with guidance from Electoral Reform Services.
Only one vote per recognised telephone number or email address will be
allowed.

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/pr_261107_uk_llpm_online_voting_begins?regioncode=-ni

I wish I had known that. I thought it was one vote per IP address. I
have and use 6 email addresses, and could create any number of extra
addresses.

Tom Crispin said:

I wish I had known that. I thought it was one vote per IP address. I
have and use 6 email addresses, and could create any number of extra
addresses.

I'm pretty sure it was one vote per phone line and one vote per IP
address whatever that link said. I think that was just sloppy
language. Incidentally, there are ways to change your IP address even
if you have just one computer and one link.

Maximising your votes is not cheating, it's simply exploiting the
rules of the ballot. Similarly with using a voting resource before
someone else of a different persuasion can get to it. It is the silly
system that is inherently unfair, not clued-up voters.

It has been shown many times that cyclists cannot be beaten in this
kind of arrangement. We are too well networked and not a few of us are
technically very able. Bear in mind too that this was a vote in which
many cyclists, including me, did not vote for the obviously pro-
cycling option, seeing it as something of a two-edged sword so
Sustrans' oppostion had it relatively easy. I'm surprised they showed
as well as they did. They must have been using multiple voting.

--
Dave...

Response to dkahn400

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I wish I had known that. I thought it was one vote per IP address. I
have and use 6 email addresses, and could create any number of extra
addresses.

I'm pretty sure it was one vote per phone line and one vote per IP
address whatever that link said. I think that was just sloppy
language.

Some way below where it says

"Only one vote per recognised telephone number or email address will be
allowed."

it goes on:

"Systems are in place to monitor and carry out checks where multiple
email votes are received from a single IP address."

So yes, sloppy language. It's all a pretty lackadaisical way of
disposing of £50m.

--
Mark, UK
"True religion is the life we lead, not the creed we profess."