In a club that I'm in, there is going to be a re-vote for the presidential election, due to the previous election, which was done on an online poll, somehow glitched and sent out the results and who voted for who for everyone to see. Now there's a big stink about it, and people are arguing endlessly. Here is an email from someone arguing that the re-vote is inherently flawed:
"I do beleive that revoting is extremely unfair and that there isnt a
justification for it. Originaly the votes were made without fear of
knowing who would know, these new votes are directly influnced by the
fact that we know who voted for who. Either there will be a repeat or
people will shuffle sides to appease peole rather than vote off their
preferences. This new election will be illegitimate.
IF THE RESULTS ARE DIFFERENT IT CAN ONLY MEAN THAT PEOPLE WERE COERCED
INTO ALTERING THEIR DESICIONS. IF YOU WANT THE LEAST COERCED VOTING
RESULTS THEN THE OLD RESULTS ARE WHAT WE SHOULD USE."
Here is my response:
"If these new results are going to be confidential, then no one will know if you voted for them or not. It would be difficult to coerce someone into doing something when you can't actually confirm that they did it or not. The voter doesn't have to tell anyone who they voted for, and there's nothing stopping them from saying that they voted for the person attempting to coerce them and then voting for someone else. This new voting is confidential. No students are able to access the voting results, or even the number of votes. Only **** can see them. "
Some people are saying that my response makes no sense, or totally misses the point. I think that they just don't get it. What do you guys think, am I totally wrong, or does it make sense?