[Magdalen] Annual Meetings, votes, was test

[Roger Stokes]

The point is that the ballot is signed on the back.  The tellers count 
the actual ballots on the front but the signature on the back is there 
if there is a complaint that X should not have voted. Their ballot can 
then be eliminated and the vote recounted.

We have a similar situation in our own civil elections in the UK where 
the ballot paper has a number that is noted against our entry in the 
electoral register when we vote.  If, after I have voted, there is a 
question as to my eligibility to do so then potentially there is the 
opportunity to identify my ballot paper.  The chances of that happening 
are infinitessimally small but they do contribute to the integrity of 
the process.

Roger

On 20/01/2015 22:31, Jo Craddock wrote:
> Oh, my gosh, Roger! The loss of the secret ballot would be more 
> contentious in the US, than the rector knowing your pledge, I do believe!
>
> I do think we are treading through a minefield. We are currently 
> blessed (or cursed, depending on one's POV, I guess) with a rector who 
> has successfully worked via media - usually making no group, much less 
> faction, completely happy. But, that has not always been, nor will it 
> always be, the case.
>
> Peace,
> Jo
>
>
> On 01/20/2015 3:35 PM, Roger Stokes wrote:
>> When I was in the chair and sensed a possibly contentious vote I 
>> objected so there would be a paper ballot which had to be signed on 
>> the back as a check that the individual was allowed to vote. 
>
>