[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: openvotingconsortium

A bar code is also not hand-modifiable. This reduces the possiblity that a voter will try to change his/her ballot after it is printed.
And your argument about "worst case scenario" doesn't hold water, because it is the exact opposite argument as the one that is used against electronic voting in the first place. I.e. If you require a paper trail (and allow a sample hand count) you can check for mistakes by looking for anomolies. Why is inviting the possiblity of discrepant count a benefit in one instance but a hinderance in another?

On another note. Joe, could you explain exactly what you think is unconstitutional?

Nick

Pete Klammer wrote:

Stepping into a question, Pete - why not a bar code?



A bar code is not hand-countable, not hand-count auditable.  Now we have to
"trust" yet another layer of electronics to translate what I thought I voted
for into a tally and a count.  At the very least, this is another
opportunity for coding error.  Above that, it asks the voter to suspend
skepticism a notch, and trust the technologists.  Worst case scenario: text
says one thing, bar codes say another.

Occams' Rule: keep it simple, stupid!  If it can be done either with a bar
code or without a bar code, then get rid of the bar code!

Pete





--
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.