« Spinning neutrinos | Main | Moriond »

January 22, 2005



I agree that not divulging full results seems very shady, but I can think of one reasonable benefit. If everyone knows that Casey Candidate (yeah, I'm cheesy) got only 2% of the vote in the last election, many people who support her this time around might vote for someone else because they don't want to waste their vote on someone who seems to have no chance of winning.

Does the election committe give any reasons for not revealing the results?


Oops... sorry 'bout the double-post, but I just thought of a better solution to the problem I proposed above. Just have everyone write two names on her ballot: "I support _____", and "I'm voting for _____"! So, not revealing the results doesn't seem like a very reasonable solution anymore.


I think the argument for not making the full results public has to do with both "protecting" candidates from the embarassment of a poor performance, and with investing the winner with approval from the whole collaboration - if the second placed was very close to the winner, the political weight of the elected spokesperson would be somewhat diminished.
None of these reasons is sufficient to me...

The comments to this entry are closed.