Yeoh Yiu wrote:
Ed Gerck <egerck@nma.com> writes:
The 'second law' also takes precedence: ballots are always secret, only vote totals are known and are known only after the election ends.
You get totals per nation, per state, per county, per riding, per precinct, per polling stion and maybe per ballot box.
The lowest possible totals are per race, per ballot box. The 'second law' allows you to have such totals -- which are the election results for that race in that ballot box. For example, if there are two candidates (X and Y) in race A , two candidates (Z and W) in race B, and only one vote per candidate is allowed in each race, the election results for ballot box K might be: Vote totals for race A in ballot box K: Votes for candidate X: 5 Votes for candidate Y: 60 Blank votes: 50 Vote totals for race B in ballot box K: Votes for candidate Z: 45 Votes for candidate W: 50 Blank votes: 20 Total ballots in ballot box K: 115 Because only the vote totals are known for each race, a voter cannot be identified by recognizing a pre-defined, unlikely voting pattern in each race of a ballot. This exemplifies one reason why we need the 'second law' -- to preserve unlinkability between ballots and voters.
So there's a need to design the system to have more voters than ballot boxes to conform to your second law.
No. All you need is that there should be more than one voter per ballot box. This is a rather trivial requirement to meet. Cheers, Ed Gerck