Ok

I accept pull requests 😁

There should be no closed source software anywhere near elections.

Indeed, and it may not even intentionally do y

Good lord. It could have been a freaking hotspot

didn't have to be wifi

I can almost guarantee there was a phone with hotspot capabilities in the vicinity

Wisconsin Elections Commission admits to breaking Wisconsin Election Law.

@RobertGrulerEsq Is this a correct interpretation of the law? Have you seen this?

Wait. It says "may not be counted". Does it need to say "shall not be counted"?

I see. This is the law in case your interested in it. I'm looking over for guidance. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/6/IV/87

Don't need to. Just need enough to convince the state legislature.

You can count on them to do what's popular in their state

Maybe, maybe not.

Depends on what's shown in court. If it's just shy of rising to the level of a court injunction, it might just be that the state legislatures find it convincing enough to appoint different delegates

I don't see too many of these guys getting thrown out for distrusting the counts in the Cities. Hell, it'd probably secure their future victory.

https://bitcadia.github.io/DownBallot/Outputs/StraightIndividualRatioCompare.html?First=GA&Second=2

why no pres runoff in GA?

ah

This whole thing could have been avoided with ranked choice

What a bastard https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Gavin-Newsom-vetoes-bill-to-allow-ranked-choice-14535193.php

Hmm, ruined my day. Here's some levity 😄

No. Were saying that the controls that are there weren't applied. That's what the statistical evidence shows when looking at ballot rejection rates and extremely high # of single vote ballots specifically in swing states that went for one candidate, but not in the states that went for the other

No it won't. Statistical evidence doesn't work to prove voter fraud.

Sure. Doesn't mean we actually had a fair election

It just means we couldn't rise to the burden of proof

It means that it's likely we didn't have a fair election. Not proof. Likely.

You get enough of those and bye bye republic

1.5 people ago we almost broke apart

Literally over this exact issue

https://twitter.com/Deadpreacher/status/1327775357588664321?s=19

https://thetexan.news/biden-campaign-operative-texas-state-senator-accused-of-mail-in-ballot-fraud/

https://twitter.com/RealWayneRoot/status/1326555434405097477?s=19

@realz is that the quote you're talking about?

I thought dominions machines could change ballots

Literally Mark them

I don't want Trump to win. I want elections fixed/political disentanglement with those who don't

> What do you mean by 'disentanglement'? Separate governments?
@Zuluzeit
No. Our votes should be separately counted and limited to the size of our county. Something like this would suffice. https://twitter.com/DrSammyD/status/1325969132844535808?s=19

Depends on if you think the popular vote means "those who voted" or "how people would vote if it were mandatory"

Then yes, it contravenes the count of those who choose to vote in favor of those who do vote representing their neighbors who can't or won't

The census is every 10 years. That rebalances

I'd be fine with abolishing the electoral college in favor of this

That could be the trade

Straight popular vote disproportionately represents more dense population

And makes Sybil attacks much easier

No. Cities have closer voting locations, better public transport, better get out the vote campaigns

Fine, if you don't want to compromise because of fair points I just brought up, we're keeping the EC

It's not gerrymandering. You apportion the vote based on how the county split

There's actually another version where you give away 💯 of the county instead of apportion it, and it goes for Biden

I'd be fine with that too

But I was trying to approximate popular vote not make more EC

The people responsible for ensuring that your vote is not diluted (poll workers) should be directly accountable to you. popular vote allows people in San Francisco to dilute your vote if you're a New Yorker.

We'll, it should apply to all state wide elections

Yeah, you should probably switch to ranked choice 😄

Just an update on the status of the Shiva theory. https://youtu.be/aokNwKx7gM8

Confirms what we thought. The existence of the slope doesn't matter.

Especially with how many slopes we found here. https://bitcadia.github.io/DownBallot/index.html

https://twitter.com/YossiGestetner/status/1327829731870388224?s=19

> Question would be if the law provides any guidance on the discretionary part
@RobertGrulerEsq
I may have found the guidance

Wisconsin.

Original thread on Wisconsin law.
https://discord.com/channels/760945067107680286/771201221145919499/776952625882857492

@meglide Don't get me wrong, I still think Mish has way too few independents voting Trump purely because of the MN, IL, and WI results, which I found due to this type of analysis, so it bore fruit. But yeah, the pure "slope" analysis is bunk. Every state we looked at had a down slope for both candidates (except MN).

@realz Added info balloons
https://bitcadia.github.io/DownBallot/ratioCompare.html
https://bitcadia.github.io/DownBallot/compare.html

... Shit. My model didn't account for house races smaller than a county and wasn't accumulating.

OK. Fixed

LOL

I mean... It make NC mecklenburg looks way worse!

I mean, if your culture is producing and seriously threatened by these people, perhaps your culture isn't worth saving...

> I know I hadn't seen one of those since the books I remember them having in my elementary school library with the iSpy books. I was like theres no way that works on a phone screen, it does !
@evildood89
I got so good at those as a kid I could just adjust my eyes by looking through the image to see the pattern

So are their ballots

@SPEARS Look into coin-join and then tell me that it's not anonymous

/ can't be made anonymous by a sophisticated user

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinJoin

That it is anonymous is the issue. There's a reason Monaro failed to launch

I mean, if you use anonymous crypto, you're just in a bigger coin-join pool

Which is why they made Monaro illegal real quick

for exchanges

Yep

I could have sworn I got an email from Bittrex about it.

Like, because of regulatory issues.

So, practically illegal if not explicitly

lol, yep. MSB is not the way to go.

Unless you accept a 5% chance of going to prison

A regular Roger Ver

lol

I've been trying to create a parallel judicial system on top of Bitcoin.

It would govern things like magic the gathering rules and game types inside of multiplayer games like Halo.

lol

I'm not an ancap. I'm a machiavellian

A cross between Cody Wilson and Mises, minus the Rothbard.

https://www.amazon.com/Machiavellians-Defenders-Freedom-James-Burnham/dp/1470889269

Yeah... Just get the audio book

Basically, I'm a libertarian who rejects the NAP as slave morality

Are you familiar with the judicial system in Ancapistan?

And how judges are selected for that?

Sure, but even in Ancapistan, selection of judges between parties not in contract with each-other will occur

So I select my judge, you select yours, They make a ruling. If they agree it's done, if they disagree, it goes to a 3rd judge who the judges have contracted with to resolve disagreements among judges.

If the judges have no common judge between them, then somebody's ruling will get enforced. The one that's enforced will likely be the judge with a greater customer base.

At that point, if the ruling against the person with the judge who has a smaller customer base is in violation of the NAP, I'm 100% ok with that.

A primary example would be copyright law.

Another example would be hacking and information theft, particularly of bitcoin private keys