Fairvote Canada
What is This Group is About?
De Quoi Parle ce Groupe?
The unofficial non-partisan Lemmy movement to bring proportional representation to all levels of government in Canada.
🗳️Voters deserve more choice and accountability from all politicians.
Le mouvement non officiel et non partisan de Lemmy visant à introduire la représentation proportionnelle à tous les niveaux de gouvernement au Canada.
🗳️Les électeurs méritent davantage de choix et de responsabilité de la part de tous les politiciens.
- A Simple Guide to Electoral Systems
- What is First-Past-The-Post (FPTP)?
- What is Proportional Representation (PR)?
- What is a Citizens’ Assembly?
- Why Referendums Aren't Necessary
- The 219 Corrupt MPs Who Voted Against Advancing Electoral Reform
Related Communities/Communautés Associées
Resources/Ressources
Official Organizations/Organisations Officielles
- List of Canadian friends of Democracy Bluesky
- Fair Vote Canada: Bluesky
- Fair Voting BC: Bluesky
- Charter Challenge for Fair Voting: Bluesky
- Electoral Renewal Canada: Bluesky
- Vote16: Bluesky
- Longest Ballot Committee: Bluesky
- ~~Make Votes Equal / Make Seats Match Votes~~
- Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto (IRV for municipal elections)
We're looking for more moderators, especially those who are of French and indigenous identities.
Politiques de modération de contenu
Nous recherchons davantage de modérateurs, notamment ceux qui sont d'identité française et autochtone.
view the rest of the comments
I don't think we're quite there yet societally for Internet voting. There's enough claims of rigged elections already.
It's fundamentally a trust problem: the way it is right now, any idiot can witness the counting process and be confident it was all done properly. You can't do that with a computer, you have to trust that the computer does what it claims to do. It would probably lead to the same issue as with mail ballots as well, it would likely favor the left and the right would do everything to discredit the validity of it.
I'm sure clever people have a neat cryptographic scheme that I would fully trust, but apart from potential UX problems, it doesn't solve that probably none of my family would trust it even if I explained it to them. And I would understand them, given big tech is constantly invading our privacy, I would be skeptical too.
Paper ballots are tangible, anyone can see that people only put one ballot in the box, that nobody messes with the box or peak into the box (votes are supposed to be anonymous). People can see that the sealed boxes are moved and opened up then counted. The ballot pusher is silly but it also shows the attention to details to ensure the confidentiality and prevent any doubt that anything fishy happened.
I think I get what you are saying.
I worked for a company that would generate electronic trails for every transaction, and we would know right away if a byte was wrong, with many details. It reduced corruption and complexity of the operation. While the information was there for anyone to understand, a lot of people just prefer to "trust the process".
When I was reading of the many ways of electronic voting, from internet voting to air gap electronic ballots, it was not different. They increased the participation of the public by simplifying the vote process, benefiting the least educated voters. They reduced the number of invalid votes (ballot not filled properly, damaged, ... ), reduced the time to vote, and reduced the number of votes lost.
In some countries, the electronic vote is similar to the paper. People go to a place, vote in an air gap computer they call electronic urn, everything follows the same process you mentioned, but instead of a box full of paper, it is this super secure urn.
It might be difficult to trust the process when people do not trust the decision makers.