On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Let me say for the record that I'm not at all happy with this data being released, since it allows vote-buying. Even if the numbers given by voters are reduced to the smallest values which still give the same rankings, with 18 candidates there are 18 factorial possible orderings. That number is sufficiently higher than the number of voters that a party wishing to buy votes can specify a voter-specific ticket with some random rankings, and be reasonably assured that if that ticket appears in the final unencrypted dump, then the contract was fulfilled and money can be transferred to the voter.
In 2008 the unencrypted votes were rapidly released, but I was not involved in that decision.
This year, I don't think I have been asked directly to provide this data, but it seems that the Board and election committee is in favour of it being released, and nobody else has offerred to produce the data. So I just wrote the relevant script, and am now testing it, so the results will be available to the committee and the Board shortly.
-- Tim Starling
Contrast your comments with those of Greg Maxwell earlier in this thread; the conclusion I draw is that while releasing the raw data might provide confirmation for anyone involved in buying votes, such vote-buying is unlikely to significantly alter the election outcome.
Nathan