View Single Post
  #484  
Old 04-27-2010, 08:02 PM
Ekowraith Ekowraith is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Disappearing in the Anchorhead basement
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraschman View Post
OR the assumption could be made that infractions were made by both sides and were enough to alter the outcome. One could assume any number of possible outcomes.

In the absence of firm evidence one way or the other, chuck the vote and go with the status quo until you can get solid numbers.
Here's what you're not getting, Kraschman. This has been explained over and over.

In order for the poll to have been illegitimate, then there must have been enough account duping that "yes" wouldn't have been a majority. And in order for that to be true, that would have to mean that margin of difference - that 15% of the "yes" votes - were all fraudulent, and none of the "no" votes were fraudulent. If it were any less than 15% yes-biased fraudulent votes, then the "yes" side would STILL be a majority. It is totally baseless to suggest that 15% of the vote was illegitimate yes votes, and 0% of the vote was illegitimate no votes. Padding happened on both sides, and not nearly enough to influence the outcome.

Read that slowly. I don't want to explain it again.