|
"rick baird" <rick.baird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
there should be point-of-transaction, voter verifiable paper backup for every single vote cast and random samplesof paper votes should be verified against machine counts.This really need not be brain surgery, and it's just too important not to do right.
Indeed. Not brain surgery, nor rocket science. And there's a web-video-anim-flash-whatever out there that explains how "it's just horse sense."
There are so many possibilities for improving our elections through the use of electronic voting machines, that haven't yet been explored. NONE of them would be in any way hindered by a voter-verified paper trail requirement, and some of them would themselves REQUIRE a voter-verified paper trail (and some would require the voter's receipt to include both machine-readable and human-readable lists of the votes the voter had cast).
Orange County, CA had a very practical punch-card system that was inherently immune to the Florida problems: the ballot cards were equally readable to counting machines or people, butterfly-ambiguities were impossible, and the punching machines were so much more robust that I don't think there was any way for them to produce a hanging chad without jamming the punch. All abandoned for something, at least in Orange County's case, that looked like a precocious 8th grader's science project.
-- JHHL
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact copyright@midrange.com.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
