After first loosing his seat by 3,555 votes, India’s Union Minister of Home Affairs, Palaniappan Chidambaram, was later told he had in fact won after a recount was conducted.
Tell me, the fact that the Rajakannappan filed a petition in Madras High Court, prove inter alia, that Chidambram's win was "manipulated"? That is even before the Court passes its judgment?ravi_ku wrote:http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_op ... ry_1268624
opponent challenging chidu
Let it first form. Would I accept Katrina Kaif's hand? I would.Dileep wrote:
Let me ask you this. Would you accept the decision by an expert committee appointed by an all party representation?
amit wrote:Tell me, the fact that the Rajakannappan filed a petition in Madras High Court, prove inter alia, that Chidambram's win was "manipulated"? That is even before the Court passes its judgment?ravi_ku wrote:http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_op ... ry_1268624
opponent challenging chidu
Sorry Ravi, you're losing it Sir.
, yes, I lost itChidambaram's opponents didn't go to court with the results? Curious isn't it
You see this AIADMK dude makes a number of allegations against Chidambaram, some of which may be true or maybe false that's going to be settled in court.Mr. Kannappan of the AIADMK, who lost in the constituency by 3,354 votes, alleged that the official machinery was made to work overtime to ensure the victory of Mr. Chidambaram. False cases were foisted on AIADMK workers to cripple their functioning. For ensuring the victory of Mr. Chidambaram, who was the Union Finance Minister until the Mumbai terror attacks in November, nationalised bank officials in the district were enlisted for election duty. When he was Finance Minister, Mr. Chidambaram opened bank branches throughout the constituency. Therefore, these officials owed allegiance to the Minister.
Mr. Kannappan said he sent a protest letter to the election officials, but it was ignored. He alleged that the election officials illegally transferred the votes he polled in the Alangudi Assembly segment to Mr. Chidambaram’s tally. The votes counted in five rounds, starting from the 11th round in the segment, were manipulated. Had this not been done, the petitioner said, he would have been declared elected by 7,034 votes. “That is why it took a very long time for the Returning Officer to declare the results and issue the Declaration Form at 8.30 p.m.”
“Check phone calls”
The petitioner said it was evident that by the noon of May 16, the Congress was set to return to power. “If the details of the phone calls made and received by the Returning Officer on his mobile phones are called for, the names of persons who had brought influence to bear upon him will come to light.”
Election officials did not declare the round-wise tallies of votes secured by each candidate in various Assembly segments. Mr. Chidambaram’s agents collected the details of the bank accounts of women self-help groups to “sumptuously park illegal funds in the accounts for purchasing their votes.” When he lodged a complaint with the Chief Electoral Officer, they resorted to issuing tokens to the SHG leaders for collecting money at the rate of Rs.500 a member on production of the tokens, he said.
Sorry Ravi, you're losing it Sir
Tanaji,Tanaji wrote:The other thing I have not yet fully grasped is why is this issue being raked up only now? EVMs were in use in the last elections as well. Yet, we did not see concerns of this sort last time. Is it because the scale at which BJP has being pushed back was so unexpected that has caused the furor to be raised now?
No that is not true. Since we are basing everything on probabilities, it is more than likely that more than one person in EC is subject to bias or is corrupt. However the question to really ask is even if a person or two is corrupt, can he really subvert the system so much that we can have large scale fraud. From what has been mentioned in the past pages, the answer is no given the lack of proof .Let me invert the question and ask you. Are you saying NONE, i.e. out of hundreds of EC officials, no one or zero officials is corrupt and everyone is doodh ka dhula?
I dont think anyone would object to the above. However, this does not automatically imply that the system has been subverted. The other issue is of course, that for certain individuals no amount of audits and transparency is enough. When one argues about "microcode" "CIA" and what not, then for such people, even the above will not satisfy them. Doesnt mean that it shouldn't be undertaken though.If you look at my arguments I have nowhere said EVMs have to removed. I have always maintained, IF EVMs are to used going forward, the EC must change its behavior to be transparent. I have given a proposal, EC should make every part, design of EVM + CU open source and allow the top 3-4 losers to choose and inspect 2-3 EVMs+ CUs of their choice all recorded on camera. Take the replacement money from them
No it isnt. Even if your favourite bug bear Navin Chawla wakes up every morning and takes his orders from Rajmata and decides when to take a leak as per her orders, it is not possible for one person to game the system. And if a large number of persons in EC are corrupt, then it follows that it is unlikely that the subversion or fraud can be carried out in a manner that is undetectable.No, it boils down to whether you believe each and every EC official (including Mr.Emergency fame Navin Chawla) is doodh ka dhula, incorruptible, upright and NEVER makes ANY security mishaps.
The entire process of using EVMs today is dependent on that assumption. I dont make that assumption, do you?
Now you are engaging in semantics here. A vast proportion of humans trust their financial transactions directly or indirectly to Microsoft and other software entities that have a past history of insecure design, bugs and what not.Pranav wrote:Boeing would not stay in business very long if planes started crashing because of corners that were cut.Tanaji wrote: Er, you are absolutely trusting your life to Boeing/Airbus when you fly. The motive there is cutting costs... money is the biggest motivator there is.
It is interesting that you say the part bolded above for EVMs. The very same logic applies to paper ballots as well: it is theoretically possible for me to replace each and every ballot with something that is in my favor. I wonder why you did not feel the need to object in the case of paper ballots?Dileep n you are talking that it is difficult. Btw nowhere, I mean nowhere has even Dileep said that it is impossible. He has been maintained that it is difficult. I am saying it is not impossible and thus care need to be taken for it.
Dileep, yes, tampering is detectable. I agree, but to whom is it detectable? Who is checking them?- after the initial checks have been completed.
Nobody has answered them.
Sanku wrote:EVMs rigged? Poll panel challenges doubters
But the Election Commission points out that Nomthondam’s software has been developed on a laptop and without access to EVMs.
Meanwhile, head of Election Commission’s experts, Professor PV Indiresan, laughs off Saigal’s complaints about the EVMs. “This is like asking Sita to prove her chastity by giving agni pariksha. That is all I can say,” says Indiresan.
Congrats Dileep.
amit,amit wrote:Tanaji,
To understand why now and not before please see first post in this series in response to a post by Dileep in the previous page.
IMHO, this is a setup to manufacture a issue for the upcoming State elections to be held in the near future.
The questions were being asked by you just after the trends started to show that 150 pages of analysis was flying out of the window and it was not a sweep for the NDA as many experts here were predicting, using Black Swan arguments and other such high faulting terminology.Pranav wrote:Actually EVM fraud related questions were being asked on this forum even before the results of the General Elections were out. Look at the archives. So much for the theories of the EVM supporters!
Actually Tanaji, I think its a strategy of some die-hard supporters who are more loyal than the king. I refuse to think that it could be a overall strategy of BJP which has so many credible leaders who are true desh bakhts.Tanaji wrote:amit wrote: amit,
Thanks, Pranav's post above seems to confirm this view. It is a given, BJP/SS is facing a serious setback in terms of seats won in Maharashtra and there will be new kingmaker in the field. Don't know about other states and BJP prospects there.
BTW, your butterfly effect is very interesting.
This is what you said on the previous page of the thread: "It's also interesting that even on BRF, this issue of EVM rigging was brought up almost immediately after the election results".amit wrote: The questions were being asked by you just after the trends started to show that 150 pages of analysis was flying out of the window and it was not a sweep for the NDA as many experts here were predicting.
Please credit some powers of memory to folks here.
Pranav wrote:EVMs with paper trails is an ideal solution. But as an interim measure, for the Maharashtra, Haryana and Jharkhand state elections, paper ballots with video recording should be used. Video should show faces of voters (but not the votes, obviously). That should satisfy those worried about ballot box stuffing.
If you are going to nitpick and sidetrack the discussion then I stand corrected. However, my central point remains.Pranav wrote:This is what you said on the previous page of the thread: "It's also interesting that even on BRF, this issue of EVM rigging was brought up almost immediately after the election results".
In fact, you'll see that the questions were raised even before the voting was over.
Each voter gets only one ballot paper. Candidates' polling agents, polling officer, security personnel are all one the scene. Even if, in the very unlikely event that they are all complicit in rigging - they can rig only one booth at a time.amit wrote:Pranav wrote:EVMs with paper trails is an ideal solution. But as an interim measure, for the Maharashtra, Haryana and Jharkhand state elections, paper ballots with video recording should be used. Video should show faces of voters (but not the votes, obviously). That should satisfy those worried about ballot box stuffing.
Can you tell me what will be achieved by showing the faces of voters? Are you going to have people sit for hours comparing frame by frame, voter by voter to see if someone is casting votes more than once? Mind you if your video does not focus on the ballot paper you won't be able to tell if a particular voter is stuffing more than one ballot paper into the box.
Some more creativity please!
Obviously it is possible to write bad software and if you read the article the EC is willing to provide the machine.Pranav wrote:Sanku wrote:EVMs rigged? Poll panel challenges doubters
But the Election Commission points out that Nomthondam’s software has been developed on a laptop and without access to EVMs.
Meanwhile, head of Election Commission’s experts, Professor PV Indiresan, laughs off Saigal’s complaints about the EVMs. “This is like asking Sita to prove her chastity by giving agni pariksha. That is all I can say,” says Indiresan.
Congrats Dileep.
Wow, the demo is wrong because you did not have access to the software, and if you ask for them to show the software, all you get is Navin Chawla's stonewalling.
Truly an Orwellian nightmare!
But the EC's rebuttal is actually null and void, you don't need access to the good software to show that it is possible to write bad software for the EVM.
Actually, at that point, in the middle of the polling process, things were looking pretty upbeat for the BJP.amit wrote:
If you are going to nitpick and sidetrack the discussion then I stand corrected. However, my central point remains.
If they are willing to provide an unprogrammed machine so that the demo software can be burned in that is good. But from the article it seems that they will only give a machine that has already been programmed. Also they are not willing to provide the software it seems.Sanku wrote:
Obviously it is possible to write bad software and if you read the article the EC is willing to provide the machine.
It is also actually possible to rig a paper ballot far more easily as well as also possible to rig a EVM + paper ballot.
Anything is possible -- even the most ridiculous things happen.
Besides, one has to know the source code of the EVMs to programme it to rig.
“The EVMs software programme is frozen and cannot be entered and it cannot be rigged,” says Indiresan.
Now I really wonder! Why didn't anyone think of all this before? That would have made ballot paper voting, secure and there would be absolutely no possibility of rigging. I'm sure even the past masters of rigging, the West Bengal CPI(M) Coordination Committe members would start quaking in their dhotis once they read about this proposal! Brilliant.Pranav wrote:Each voter gets only one ballot paper. Candidates' polling agents, polling officer, security personnel are all one the scene. Even if, in the very unlikely event that they are all complicit in rigging - they can rig only one booth at a time.
The ballot box should be in the video, so any stuffing will be recorded. But stuffing is not possible unless all the above mentioned people are complicit in giving people multiple ballot papers. People should fold the ballot paper before putting it in the box if they are sensitive about privacy.
Furthermore, video can be reviewed for that booth for which there are complaints. Judicious use of the fast-forward button can greatly reduce the time required. In any case, it is the complainants volunteers who will do the reviewing.
Faces of voters should be on the video, so in case there are complaints about outsiders voting, that can be investigated.
Judicious use of the fast-forward button can greatly reduce the time required. In any case, it is the complainants volunteers who will do the reviewing.
yes.Sanku wrote:Pranav have you actually ever casted a vote? Serious question?
Pranav,Pranav wrote:Actually, at that point, in the middle of the polling process, things were looking pretty upbeat for the BJP.
The demo is wrong because there is no way you can access the controller, even if the EVM is given to the hacker. Anyone can make a software running on the PC that mimics the EVM and then hack that.Pranav wrote:Sanku wrote:EVMs rigged? Poll panel challenges doubters
But the Election Commission points out that Nomthondam’s software has been developed on a laptop and without access to EVMs.
Meanwhile, head of Election Commission’s experts, Professor PV Indiresan, laughs off Saigal’s complaints about the EVMs. “This is like asking Sita to prove her chastity by giving agni pariksha. That is all I can say,” says Indiresan.
Congrats Dileep.
Wow, the demo is wrong because you did not have access to the software, and if you ask for them to show the software, all you get is Navin Chawla's stonewalling.
Truly an Orwellian nightmare!
But the EC's rebuttal is actually null and void, you don't need access to the good software to show that it is possible to write bad software for the EVM.
Video recording the voting process is a very serious and credible means for improving voting integrity. It was in fact done on a limited scale in the May elections. Although it cannot prevent EVM fraud, it can be very useful where there are paper trails.amit wrote: Now I really wonder! Why didn't anyone think of all this before? That would have made ballot paper voting, secure and there would be absolutely no possibility of rigging. I'm sure even the past masters of rigging, the West Bengal CPI(M) Coordination Committe members would start quaking in their dhotis once they read about this proposal! Brilliant.
Judicious use of the fast-forward button can greatly reduce the time required. In any case, it is the complainants volunteers who will do the reviewing.
Apologies Pranav ji, but I was just trying to visualise a defeated candidate along with EC officials sitting and fast forwarding the video tape to see how much rigging happened. Meanwhile supporters of the "winning" candidate were doing a "lungi" dance outside.
More power to creativity. Anything to keep EVM rigging in the limelight, it's only a few months then pay dirt during electioneering!
Could you please list what went catastrophically wrong in 1998, 1999 and 2004 where extensive use of paper ballots was made that has resulted in the sudden requirement of video shooting?Pranav wrote:Each voter gets only one ballot paper. Candidates' polling agents, polling officer, security personnel are all one the scene. Even if, in the very unlikely event that they are all complicit in rigging - they can rig only one booth at a time.amit wrote:
Can you tell me what will be achieved by showing the faces of voters? Are you going to have people sit for hours comparing frame by frame, voter by voter to see if someone is casting votes more than once? Mind you if your video does not focus on the ballot paper you won't be able to tell if a particular voter is stuffing more than one ballot paper into the box.
Some more creativity please!
The ballot box should be in the video, so any stuffing will be recorded. But stuffing is not possible unless all the above mentioned people are complicit in giving people multiple ballot papers. People should fold the ballot paper before putting it in the box if they are sensitive about privacy.
Furthermore, video can be reviewed for that booth for which there are complaints. Judicious use of the fast-forward button can greatly reduce the time required. In any case, it is the complainant's volunteers who will do the reviewing.
Faces of voters should be on the video, so in case there are complaints about outsiders voting, that can be investigated.
All in all, this system is far more secure than EVMs.
I'm sure preventive arrest etc is good - but videocam technology is cheaper than ever before, and it would be almost impossible to to fake a video that shows faces of voters (since that can be correlated with photos on the voters' lists and if necessary with the individuals themselves.)Tanaji wrote: Could you please list what went catastrophically wrong in 1998, 1999 and 2004 where extensive use of paper ballots was made that has resulted in the sudden requirement of video shooting?
Ballot stuffing issue was serious right up to 1996. EC managed to contain it by using preventive arrest strategy and massive security presence. Why do you think that this is not enough?
The demo is wrong because there is no way you can access the controller, even if the EVM is given to the hacker. Anyone can make a software running on the PC that mimics the EVM and then hack that.Dileep wrote: Wow, the demo is wrong because you did not have access to the software, and if you ask for them to show the software, all you get is Navin Chawla's stonewalling.
Truly an Orwellian nightmare!
But the EC's rebuttal is actually null and void, you don't need access to the good software to show that it is possible to write bad software for the EVM.
What does that going to prove? That the controller can execute a software? What kind of an argument is this Pranav? We all know that if you load a software on the controller, it can do whatever you program it to.Pranav wrote: If they are willing to provide an unprogrammed machine so that the demo software can be burned in that is good. But from the article it seems that they will only give a machine that has already been programmed. Also they are not willing to provide the software it seems.
Sanku wrote:The demo is wrong because there is no way you can access the controller, even if the EVM is given to the hacker. Anyone can make a software running on the PC that mimics the EVM and then hack that.Dileep wrote: Wow, the demo is wrong because you did not have access to the software, and if you ask for them to show the software, all you get is Navin Chawla's stonewalling.
Truly an Orwellian nightmare!
But the EC's rebuttal is actually null and void, you don't need access to the good software to show that it is possible to write bad software for the EVM.
What do you have to say about ECs challenge? I am eager to know.
Then you will know that the presence of videography during the process itself will spook many voters. Even a potential loss of secret ballot is a huge huge things which you just don't seem to understand.Pranav wrote:yes.Sanku wrote:Pranav have you actually ever casted a vote? Serious question?
No Pranav actually the demo does nothing of the sort. In fact it I would have said it does nothing of the sort even when I did not know that all they did was rug a thought experiement, even if they had shown a possible bug in actual EC software I would not have assumed that the election was rigged because there was bug.Pranav wrote: Sanku, the whole point of the demo is to show that the voting can be rigged by a crooked government who installs a criminal CEC and stonewalls requests for the software to be made open. Obviously you need an unprogrammed EVM for that.
Then there is no need for a demo. We all know that it can be done.Pranav wrote:Sanku, the whole point of the demo is to show that the voting can be rigged by a crooked government who installs a criminal CEC and stonewalls requests for the software to be made open. Obviously you need an unprogrammed EVM for that.
The video should not capture the mark voters put on the ballot paper. Voters should fold ballot before dropping it in.Sanku wrote:
Secondly how does videography help? If the process is itself so far gone, its easy to rig a video too. Heck a video isnt even a admissable evidence as per court of law.
Why will EC or anyone use something which it cant take to court even if it catches a problem?
Lets really get real folks.
Good, thanks for the admission. IMHO, video recorded voting with paper trails is more secure than EVMs. I say EVMs alone are too insecure, and you may say the opposite thing.Dileep wrote: Then there is no need for a demo. We all know that it can be done.
Shall I do a demo on how paper ballot can be rigged, in the similar fashion?