Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
The Daily Mail is reporting on a funny conspiracy theory with Brexit voters calling for people to take pens into the voting booths instead of pencil so their votes can't be changed.

I didn't do that...though I admit that there was a pen already in the booth which I used instead of the pencil.

In unrelated news, stores are reporting a sudden, mysterious shortage of Tippex

Who the feth's got the time and energy to change millions of ballot papers.

Ridiculous. The Daily Fail are always making up this kind of crap.

It's perfectly legal to use a pen if you want. The law requires clerks to supply pencils tied down to the booths with a long enough string to accommodate a left or right hander.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who the feth's got the time and energy to change millions of ballot papers.

Ridiculous. The Daily Fail are always making up this kind of crap.

It's perfectly legal to use a pen if you want. The law requires clerks to supply pencils tied down to the booths with a long enough string to accommodate a left or right hander.

The Daily Mail is not "making it up", they're merely reporting that some Brexit voters on twitter are peddling a silly conspiracy theory. The tone of the article is rather comedic to be honest. The DM is mocking the idea, not supporting it.

There was only pencils when i went to mine - i insisted on using a pen.

Credit to the people there, they got me a black biro to use when asked.

Just got back from the polling station. I decided to vote Remain in the end. Even though I see plenty of "potential" in leaving the EU, I think this referendum is really more about the future of the Tory party. I don't think anyone can say with any certainty if we'd be better economically in or out of Europe, but I know for damn sure that the brightest future for Britain is the one without Michael Gove anywhere near government. Really hoping to wake up tomorrow to news of his resignation, and Boris Johnson's career on the rocks. Hopefully, we'll have rid ourselves of Nigel Farage either way.

In the event we do vote to leave (and we do actually leave), I'm not too worried. I think we're absolutely going to experience a few years of recession, and I expect Boris will make a bid for the Tory leadership, which sounds like a disaster. But in the long run (with the overwhelming exception of incompetent leadership aside)... I don't see why it couldn't work

I decided to vote Remain in the end

Chicken!!!





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who the feth's got the time and energy to change millions of ballot papers.

Ridiculous. The Daily Fail are always making up this kind of crap.

It's perfectly legal to use a pen if you want. The law requires clerks to supply pencils tied down to the booths with a long enough string to accommodate a left or right hander.

This morning, the BBC reported that 300 counting stations will handle the vote. This afternoon, it's 325 counting stations.

Where did the extra 25 counting stations come from?

That's an old CIA trick

The person who has impressed me most in the campaign is the Scottish lady who was in the debate a couple of nights ago.

If it's Leave I think Cameron will fall on his sword, which will trigger a Conservative leadership contest and might possibly lead to a vote of No Confidence and a general election.

If it's Remain I think Johnson and Farage will hang around moping and moaning and causing trouble forever. Especially if it's close.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The person who has impressed me most in the campaign is the Scottish lady who was in the debate a couple of nights ago.

If it's Leave I think Cameron will fall on his sword, which will trigger a Conservative leadership contest and might possibly lead to a vote of No Confidence and a general election.

If it's Remain I think Johnson and Farage will hang around moping and moaning and causing trouble forever. Especially if it's close.

UKIP can't lose. They'll do an SNP regardless of the result.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The person who has impressed me most in the campaign is the Scottish lady who was in the debate a couple of nights ago.

If it's Leave I think Cameron will fall on his sword, which will trigger a Conservative leadership contest and might possibly lead to a vote of No Confidence and a general election.

If it's Remain I think Johnson and Farage will hang around moping and moaning and causing trouble forever. Especially if it's close.

UKIP can't lose. They'll do an SNP regardless of the result.

Could they be kingmakers in 2020?

Farage has done well for a 'former' political party leader.

The SNP saps votes from Labour, The LIb Dems are still on the floor (although they could regain some ground locally). The Greens are..doing whatever they do.

Also I saw the other day that Corbyn is still set on whipping the party over Trident...Maybe concentrate and on an attack at a vulnerable Tory leadership or something?.......Nah..

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
The Daily Mail is reporting on a funny conspiracy theory with Brexit voters calling for people to take pens into the voting booths instead of pencil so their votes can't be changed.

I didn't do that...though I admit that there was a pen already in the booth which I used instead of the pencil.

That would require a massive amount of people to work.

Tin foil hat time.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The person who has impressed me most in the campaign is the Scottish lady who was in the debate a couple of nights ago.

If it's Leave I think Cameron will fall on his sword, which will trigger a Conservative leadership contest and might possibly lead to a vote of No Confidence and a general election.

If it's Remain I think Johnson and Farage will hang around moping and moaning and causing trouble forever. Especially if it's close.

UKIP can't lose. They'll do an SNP regardless of the result.

Could they be kingmakers in 2020?

Farage has done well for a 'former' political party leader.

The SNP saps votes from Labour, The LIb Dems are still on the floor (although they could regain some ground locally). The Greens are..doing whatever they do.

Also I saw the other day that Corbyn is still set on whipping the party over Trident...Maybe concentrate and on an attack at a vulnerable Tory leadership or something?.......Nah..

I've lived through one referendum before today's so here's what happened up here..

In Scotland, anybody who voted for independence went over to the SNP. Why would you vote for Lib/Lab/Con - parties that supported the Union? The 2015 General Election result bears that out.

And the same principal is at work here. Anybody who votes leave, especially working class voters in traditional Labour heartlands, are unlikely to return to Labour.

UKIP is the only place they can go to. UKIP can't lose, even if it's a remain vote.

I believe that whatever the result, we'll see a watershed in British politics that hasn't been seen since Thatcher took office in '79. I think it will be a once in a generation shift.

Thatcher forced the Labour party to change. Europe will probably change the Conservative party. Expect to see defections to UKIP.

Bear in mind Cameron's effective majority is only 17. Every MP who defects to UKIP is a serious loss.

Could the Conservative party fracture? or is UKIP the perfect home?

I can imagine rebels hanging onto to Tory coattails rather than defect to what is perceived to be the slightly more evil organisation.

Boris et al will stay to pollute an internal power struggle.

Corbyn will mention Trident a few times no matter how the vote goes today.

the future political scene is beyond computation, it's so random.

I have no idea what will happen with my default party, Labour. There was a hilarious, chilling documentary on vice, when Corybn said his job was not to exploit government errors (he hardly mentioned when IDS pretended he was resigning due to cruelty to poor people etc). Instead he said his role was "to challenge the party."

He meant his own party. Ulp.

Blair also challenged the party.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
the future political scene is beyond computation, it's so random.

I have no idea what will happen with my default party, Labour. There was a hilarious, chilling documentary on vice, when Corybn said his job was not to exploit government errors (he hardly mentioned when IDS pretended he was resigning due to cruelty to poor people etc). Instead he said his role was "to challenge the party."

He meant his own party. Ulp.

Predicting the future is often a waste of time, but IMO this is a likely outcome:

Assume Britain votes Remain.

In 2020 Labour will lose. Why?

Corbyn - Middle England will never buy into that, and the key marginal and 200,000 undecideds will probably stick with the Tories.

Working Class voters - even before the referendum, UKIP was making big gains in Labour's traditional heartlands. Like I said above, UKIP is the only place these voters can go, especially if they voted leave.

Boundary changes - Benefit the Tories.

Scotland - Labour may never win this back, and besides, independence is the fault line in Scottish politics, just as independence from the EU will run through English politics for a few years.

It all adds up to a Labour defeat.

I predict a rise in English nationalism, the Union to end, the Lib Dems to be as useless as ever in 2020, and UKIP to make massive gains, but not enough to make a government on their own. They will exert major influence over a fractured Tory Party.

And Cameron to go, with Osborne's leadership hopes gone with him

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Blair also challenged the party.

Absolutely right but he did challenge the bloody other side, too. He owned Cameron at PMQ whereas Corbyn's main plan seems to be to soothe the opposition into a deep enough sleep that he can suddenly seize the reins of power. :(

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Could the Conservative party fracture? or is UKIP the perfect home?

I can imagine rebels hanging onto to Tory coattails rather than defect to what is perceived to be the slightly more evil organisation.

Boris et al will stay to pollute an internal power struggle.

Corbyn will mention Trident a few times no matter how the vote goes today.

Corbyn has been severely dented, because the 2 things he cares about the most (getting rid of Trident, and opposing the EU) have seen him abandon his principles with major U-turns.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Could the Conservative party fracture? or is UKIP the perfect home?

I can imagine rebels hanging onto to Tory coattails rather than defect to what is perceived to be the slightly more evil organisation.

Boris et al will stay to pollute an internal power struggle.

Corbyn will mention Trident a few times no matter how the vote goes today.

Corbyn has been severely dented, because the 2 things he cares about the most (getting rid of Trident, and opposing the EU) have seen him abandon his principles with major U-turns.

I have said it before, he is a polytechnic rabble rouser, out of his depth on a big stage.

He had ample opportunity to press Cameron on EU reforms and to push his agenda home when Cameron came back like a whipped curr.

Still, I am ignoring news media tonight. I'll try and catch up on the results later this evening.

You can make your choice with a pencil ? Isn't this very risky ?
The vote could be erased and changed.

 godardc wrote:
You can make your choice with a pencil ? Isn't this very risky ?
The vote could be erased and changed.

Not likely, since votes are put in a sealed box and when counting there is an observer watching you. Also pens can be crossed out and votes can be spoiled by adding a X to the other box.

It's a very serious offence to tamper with votes and not worth prison, because if there is evidence found of tampering with votes, then the referendum is invalid and will probably be done again.

The old ways are the best.

Oh no! You don't want to go arseing around with the old ways.

The French went arseing around with the old ways and look where it got them!

It's not really more risky to do it with a pencil than with a pen or a computer.

There will be always fraud, but you can't do it if the risks and time needed to make it happen aren't worth it.

To me, this referendum isn't worth the huge pain trying to cheat on the votes. If it is close, I think they can find another way for both sides to get what they want.

Conspiracy theory, saying that "it's too close to decide to leave" or whatever reason they may pick out of their hat.

Funny that in our own news, the subject suddenly "pops up" like it was a death or life matter. Really, that's just a referendum, we had others in EU before and we know all how it ended: lots of noise for very little effect. I'm frankly expecting the same here. Maybe there will be a political earthquake inside your country, but that's internal matter IMHO.

Like you guys would care about what happen in Belgium government right now. I know, you don't, and that's perfectly understandable.

Computer is more risky because the nature of digital files means it is possible to change a massive number of votes very quickly and completely erase the traces of having done so. It can even be done using algorithms to search and replace votes according to patterns to make the new results look natural.

This isn't possible when you are dealing with millions of bits of paper. It simply is too much work by too many people to be able to keep it secret.

I am not saying that cheating on computers actually happens, only that the inherent nature of digital documentation makes it technically feasible with a very small number of people involved.

Voting officially closed. Let the fools count their votes *cue Mr Burns meme*.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Computer is more risky because the nature of digital files means it is possible to change a massive number of votes very quickly and completely erase the traces of having done so. It can even be done using algorithms to search and replace votes according to patterns to make the new results look natural.

This isn't possible when you are dealing with millions of bits of paper. It simply is too much work by too many people to be able to keep it secret.

I am not saying that cheating on computers actually happens, only that the inherent nature of digital documentation makes it technically feasible with a very small number of people involved.

I think some sort of failsafe system would be pretty easy to come up with. During voting each individual machine is disconnected from a central server. After voting on each machine is finished, the database on that machine is locked and cannot be changed. The machines are then connected to the central server and their databases transferred. Central server then checks received database against database stored on each individual machine then outputs the final tally and the working out. The individual database tallies are also printed out and then you check them with the final one.

This way you would have to tamper with each voting machine individually as by the time they are all networked the results are locked and cannot be changed on that machine. If you try to change them between the voting machine and the central counting machine then it ends up flagging the database as incorrect. This would mean that you'd need to tamper with a lot of individual machines to influence the result.

Obviously this is just a general idea, I don't know enough about computing to know if it is possible to build such a system that has the desired effect.

My gut instinct says it's going to be a pretty massively in favour vote to remain. I have a feeling that all the "you're a terrible person if you vote leave" facebook, twitter posts etc will significantly sway over the undecideds to vote remain.

Here's an article about a way to falsify the results on a Diebold machine. It requires physical access to the machine, so it's harder to do than a network solution. It's also 10 years old and maybe the modern machines have been upgraded.

http://gizmodo.com/200693/how-to-steal-an-election-with-a-diebold-machine


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Right, I think I will go to bed now and then get up early to start to see the results.

Same, but it might be easy enough to program it so that a vote for Remain is changed to Leave or vice versa.

The simpsons clip of Homer trying to vote for Obama springs to mind. Probably not an accurate portrayal but hey if it can be imagined some tech-savvy person could potentially code it.

I've been watching too much Simpsons to try and take my mind of it, especially since it's coming to an end.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Computer is more risky because the nature of digital files means it is possible to change a massive number of votes very quickly and completely erase the traces of having done so. It can even be done using algorithms to search and replace votes according to patterns to make the new results look natural.

This isn't possible when you are dealing with millions of bits of paper. It simply is too much work by too many people to be able to keep it secret.

It is possible, it's just a question of balance between risks and gains.

Computer isn't especially more used for electoral fraud. There are still ways to do it, sure, but like for the old pen and paper method , you need a structure specially made for it and the manpower to enable this. The more people are involved, the higher are the risks - especially when you don't have a total control on the inside apparatus at the beginning.

Thinking just one program can do it all and that will work everytime is just thinking hacking is magic. Also, the only machine in use for elections in the whole world isn't the one described and there is human supervision behind. The long myth of the hacked computer with data disappearing without a track on all the machines involved on a country scale is just ridiculous.

The article shows it's possible on a very specific matter ten years ago. I don't find it reasonnable to be afraid of computers just because of that. We use computer for years now in Belgium - we had more trouble with local software failure than actual fraud. And it wasn't that much as well.