Hmm. I wonder about this:

Does that mean four of the blank votes are yours? I guess that's better than using your four votes on a candidate.

This also begs raises the question, how many of the other voting accounts on maemo.org do not belong to a unique user? Unlike other voting processes, it is very difficult to ensure a 1:1 ratio between accounts and users.

Setting some reasonable karma limit would probably avoid this - if someone worked hard enough to have 4 accounts with enough karma then well done!

You can't verify the accuracy of either quote, but I can give you my word I have usually voted blank in government-related voting procedures.

See above.

Better or worse depends on intension and goal.

This raises that question indeed which is precisely my point, and one of the reasons why I feel the current voting process is flawed.

Yes, well, we all very much appreciate you abusing the voting system.

It'd make it more difficult indeed. That should be one of the goals: to minimize possibility of fraud.

However, many people involved in Maemo do not have a maemo.org account nor are they active on maemo.org. There are many third party websites in existence besides Internettablettalk.com. One of the valid reasons for this is that Internettablettalk.com is English-centered.

I'd say there needs to be a discussion held about who is eligable to vote, and how we get people who are involved with Maemo to vote. This should also include a dialogue with other (perhaps less popular) Maemo and NIT websites.

One way could be to allow people to become a registered voter by donating a small amount of money and providing their real name. Then send people their unique code by snail mail in a closed, sealed envelope. The problem here would be that one cannot verify the real name easily, but because money is added to a bank account this can be done. Therefore, it does add another layer making it more difficult to commit fraud. The money would be spend on the snail mail.

And, you are not in a position to speak for all, thankyouverymuch.

allnameswereout: Thank you for correcting my term. I learned something new! Stupid Latin translation; "taking the premise for granted" would make more sense than "begging the question". It makes perfect sense to say, "that begs the question," when you want to say, "this situation really requires a new question to be asked." But the Oxford Guide to English Usage disparages the usage, so I'd better stop or get in trouble with the Language Police. After all, English has such strict language rules

allnameswereout,

its very easy to be unique.
People have already paid for their devices.

One vote per device, we already have to use the unique mac address thing for getting updates, it can be used the same.

And before anyone says "but he's got 5 devices, so what - hes paid 5 times more than you.

You're welcome, qole. The reason for opposing 'begging the question' in contexts similar as the one you used ('raising the question') are IMO 1) it degrades an old English term used to mark a fallacy 2) it appears one if forced to ask the question while one is not (necessarily) forced to do so.

Paying per MAC address might seem like an option, but a MAC address can be faked, and a second hand N770 is a lot cheaper than a new N810. Are each worth exactly one vote?

qolling has reached a new high.