“if you apply that argument then you would provide no information on any topic”
If you applied my lgic you would only provide information which was to the concern of the everyday citizen, not people bent on harrassing the AEC ever since the day they lost a council election.

re The Green vote in Victoria I suggest you do more analysis of the vote try looking at the 4PP of both elections discounting the general percentage swing away from the liberals and you will see the Greens did no better. 2004 the swing was to against the Liberals in 2007 it was and the Greens still failed, thank god, to get elected. Your will need 5% more votes if you are to to rely to the corrupt Bonus Votes and preferences. Did you d the exercise in calculating the distortion in the vote. I suggest you learn more about how the system works, the maybe you can produce a more credible argument. Perhaps you should take a look at the BTL preference data as it will help you understand how the votes are distributed. LOL

“you sell him (Risstrom) out.”
I did not ’sell him out’, only pointed out the fact that he got a lower vote in ‘04 than di Natale got in ‘07. So, I would suggest, di Natale was a better candidate.

I note and laugh that you still have not answered the substantive question Why you think the Below-the-line preference data should not be published?

Avoiding the question are you?

Your lying when you claim I do not do anything about policies my party has not addressed. Try again.

“My criticism of the Greens is the BS contradictions in their policies..”
Give me one contradiction, with appropriate evidence (i.e. another source, not your own conspiracy theaory) to back it up.

“I disagree with them (the Greens)”
Really, I never would’ve guessed. What is your real problem with them? If it’s purely contradictory policies, then what is the Labor party?

“You still have not provided an answer to my question.. Why should the BTL preference data not be published? You do believe i open and transparent government and elections I trust? Risstrom understands the issue you obviously do not.”
Why would Joe Average care the least about BTL preference data? And where, pray tell, has David Risstrom spoken out about it (give me a source, not your own ramblings)

“The ALP is very much aware of this issue and hopefully they will address it.”
In other words: their yet to address it. Or, even more clearly: Labor are doing nothing about it. But forget that; criticise the Greens!

“After all the reform to the Upperhouse did not come about because of the Greens. That I am 100% sure of.”
You’re right. The Greens never campaigned for Upper House reform… BS!

“lets see who well informed you are as to how the system works…”
Well, I have a good enough idea of how you work: harrassing the AEC, lying about the Greens, championing Labor and your friend Risstrom.

Cris It is simple really.. look at the last two counts. When Family First is distributed add to it the ticket vote from One Nation (This is the hypothetical I am using to demonstrate the seriousness of the flaw in the system that Sean does not understand or tries to avoid people knowing.)

The Hypothetical would result i Labor falling just below quota and would require the Liberal 3rd candidate Surplus to be distributed.

Under the rules adopted by the ARC the surplus is divided equally by the number of ballot papers allocated to the Liberal no 3 candidate. This is where the distortion 2700+ “Bonus votes” come from. The system adds value to the Liberal Ticket vote which has over 1.2 billion ballot papers worth a fraction of their original value. The votes that come from Family First are full value and represent over 26% of the Liberal Surplus. Under the SEC rules they are transferred at less then 10% of the surplus disproportionally to their original value.

This “bonus” votes flows on to the Greens and elected the Green candidate not on Merrit but on the inbuilt distortion in the system.

If you apply the same results based on the value of the voet (Not the number of ballot papres) the ALP rightly is elected on Family First Preference flow.

Litte wonder why the Greens want to avoid this issue… Now you know

That would be a too time-consuming and complex for me.