-9

One of the reason that some places in the not-Stack Overflow-universe don't share that or when someone voted is to help prevent voter intimidation. On Stack Overflow it's probably not as big of a deal because of the sheer volume of the site, but on smaller sites it can leak information that can lead to bad blood.

I propose that we not show who voted until after the election. Yeah, it's a lot of code for a small badge, but it shows that we have peoples' privacy in mind. Otherwise I can know who has voted so far in the election by just looking for the most recent Constituent badges on a given site.

As Luuklag points out, it should not be shown on the user page either as part of this request for the current election. It's fine to show to the user, just not to the not-user.

10
  • 7
    Why is it a problem to know who's voted? It's not like we can see who they voted for. Oct 20 '20 at 13:20
  • @Randal'Thor this is definitely one of those occasions where I know that something is a problem but not so much why it's a problem. As I said above, it's around voter intimidation, and privacy. I wish I were eloquent enough to properly state what the thing in the back of my mind is, but today is not that day. Hopefully someone can come along and do so. (where's Shog when you really need him)
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:30
  • I agree with @Randal'Thor here. There is no way to use that information to deduct on what candidate one voted, unless there is only 1 candidate. In that case an entire election is pointless.
    – Luuklag
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:30
  • 2
    The only thing you can intimidate people to do is vote, when you know someone doesn't have that badge. Which would kind of being a good thing, as we would want people to vote.
    – Luuklag
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:31
  • Consider a scenario: John is a super-popular chat user and has +30k rep on the site. John hasn't voted yet, because he's still thinking who he wants his choices to be. The other users can see that John hasn't voted yet and infer something off of that useless bit of data that says he hasn't voted.
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:32
  • @Luuklag Ironically, related current HNQ. Oct 20 '20 at 13:34
  • 1
    To be clear, you should still get the badge as soon as it's awarded. I just want the collective page to not show for the current election.
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:37
  • Well then you could still visit a persons profile and see if it was awarded or not
    – Luuklag
    Oct 20 '20 at 13:43
  • 1
    I think the "last seen" on user profiles is more problematic (e.g. "Last seen 58 mins ago" on Jon Skeet's user profile right now). A lot can be inferred from that, especially if logged continuously over a long time (e.g. time spend on Stack Overflow during work hours or "Is on Stack Overflow at 0400 hours local time. What is the matter?"). Oct 23 '20 at 18:51
  • Good call.I agree
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 23 '20 at 20:49
12

The inspiration for that badge came from physical stickers (back when I didn't just vote by mail):

"I voted" sticker

Here in the US, it’s common to at least get a sticker when voting, a token to wear the rest of the day in recognition of your civic-mindedness. Starting today, we’ll be handing out virtual stickers – badges – for visiting and voting

-- Election participation badges

There have been some issues with it in the past (possibility to match up sequence of badges with votes), but votes were randomized in the ballot file to mitigate that issue.

I think it's fine, a bit of civic pride. Wish I had a sticker for the ballot I just dropped in the mail... 😕

18
  • 2
    good to know the stv file is randomized. Oct 20 '20 at 13:54
  • 2
    The difference I see here is that the "I Voted" stickers are not automatically stuck to people, it's a choice to wear them... Oct 20 '20 at 14:27
  • 1
    That'd be a nice option for many badges, @the
    – Shog9
    Oct 20 '20 at 14:28
  • 2
    Maybe that's the FR then? Allow me to elect to not have my badges publicly shared?
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 14:56
  • Sounds a bit obscure, @jco - I think it'd be more fun to allow you to choose a badge or badges to "wear", where that could mean display in a list, on profile, even on usercard.
    – Shog9
    Oct 20 '20 at 14:58
  • 1
    Hmmm ... I smell another FR then ... (this is obviously a much larger concept than the one here, because it's gonna mean a lot of touches I suspect)
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 15:00
  • 1
    FWIW: a threat model for knowing who voted does exist, but it's much more constrained than knowing how folks voted. And realistically, it's dangerous to completely hide voters too: makes it easier to make up votes.
    – Shog9
    Oct 20 '20 at 15:00
  • Agreed Shog, but also to be considered is that existing as a white male, whether in the US or outside, and especially on StackOverflow, is not the same as existing as, say, a black woman. As we want to encourage more community participation, some privacy has to be maintained. I don't have to more than hint at the bubbling pustules of chat that we know goes on regarding how people participate on this site for those of us who know they exist to think about how the conversations must go in those places. Oh to be 14 and on /. again, yeah? (no, I don't want that actually, it was ugly and nasty)
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 15:04
  • (also I was never on /. at 14. I barely had a Windows 3.1 computer. /. didn't come about till well after I graduated HS)
    – jcolebrand
    Oct 20 '20 at 15:04
  • 1
    Be careful about suggesting ways to hide folks for their own good; everyone has their own needs and tolerances, but giving folks a choice allows them to choose what is best vs having that assumed for them. Also, '99 was Peak /. IMHO
    – Shog9
    Oct 20 '20 at 15:07
  • What is the purpose? To get others to vote? Oct 23 '20 at 18:44
  • To encourage voting, yeah @P.Mort - and to recognize participation in the process.
    – Shog9
    Oct 23 '20 at 18:49
  • Since Constituent is one of the candidate score badges, isn't it possible for a candidate to artificially increase their candidate score from what it was at the time they nominated by voting in the current election? Shouldn't it not be awarded until after the election in that case, so the score accurately reflects whether or not they voted in a past election (as it indicates at the time of nominations)? Oct 23 '20 at 19:05
  • How is that "artificial", @sonic?
    – Shog9
    Oct 23 '20 at 19:06
0

I can get behind this. Right now, there is a stream of "who-just-voted" details behind that badge.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .