Re: [tlug] Somewhat OT- open source software for US voting machines

["Ian Wells" <ijw@example.com>]

Sorry, a bit late into this conversation, but internet voting is
something that irritates me every time I read about it.

2008/9/30 Edward Middleton <emiddleton@example.com>:
> In order to run free and fair elections at a minimum
>
> 1. you need to have universal access to voting.
>
> 2. you need to be able to insure that voters can cast their ballots freely.
>

3. You must ensure that votes cannot be purchased.  (Which is a
slightly different problem - I can freely choose to vote for who
someone paid me to vote for.)

In order to do this, elections are held as secret ballots.  And if the
environment in which the voter places their vote is not strictly
controlled, the ballot cannot possibly be secret.

Thus, if you place a vote on the internet, someone could be checking
that you vote the way you agreed to vote.  Postal votes have a similar
problem, which is why the UK's insistence that postal votes are great
because they increase turnout irritates me every time I read it.  I've
yet to hear of a better system than voting in a booth.  (Incidentally,
one way of spoiling a ballot in the UK is to sign it.)


The remainder of the argument for electronic voting systems, internet
aside, seems to be because it's easier for people to vote and cheaper
to count the vote.  I wasn't aware that writing an 'x' on a ballot was
considered intellectually challenging, personally, but the US
government seems to believe it is.  As for counting the vote, give me
1000 yen and I'll tell you the results of the election.  My count will
be totally wrong, but it'll only cost 1000 yen...

-- 
Ian.