Re: [MLUG] Diebold demands that HBO cancel documentary on votingmachines

[McIntosh Jason <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Ok guys, how about this kind of a system.  Been thinking about this for a while, and honestly, it seems like it would work great to me:

1)  You have an electronic voting machine which (perhaps optionally) prints out a unique number upon completion, including the text of each thing you were voting on.  (Another option would be to include how you voted)

2)  This unique identifier can be verified later by going online to a website.  You can type in the number (nothing else is required, the number isn't personally identifiable, etc.), and see what your votes were registered as.

3)  A system to handle complaints about your registered vote would have to be in place - this has to be very carefully done so people don't change their minds later.

The above system would let you keep a paper trail, use electronic voting, and have a way to validate your vote later.  The biggest issue I have with electronic voting systems, or any voting system for that matter, is there's no way currently to say "was my vote the vote I put in?".  

Just a thought - what do people think?  Good idea?  Bad idea?  Things I should add/remove?

Jason

 

--

/--------------------------------------|---------------------------\

| Jason McIntosh                       | CELL: 573-424-7612        |

| Webmaster, thinker, programmer, etc. | WORK: 573-884-3865        |

| http://poetshome.com/                |                           |

|------------------------------------------------------------------|

|"How should I know if it works?  That's what beta testers are     |

|for.  I only coded it."                                           |

|(Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting)            |

\--------------------------------------|---------------------------/

GnuPG Key:  http://poetshome.com/about/jmcintosh_mlug.missouri.edu.gpgkey

On Nov 7, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Vern Green wrote:

I have to say there is some pretty convincing evidence on this thing. There are a couple of things in the beginning that I did not understand, like the spelling of authorised on one of their documents.

 

I still have to say that I don't think this is a vast republican conspiracy despite what is being suggested. If it is, then it is because Diebold is doing it. The tampering with the memory cards while effective, is still too vast to grant the number of votes needed to overturn an election. Additionally, if Diebold was doing something to the cards, they would have to know exactly where the hot-bed is going to be and know it early enough in order to make it work out.

 

What is even more troubling to me is Diebold in the end said their machines are more accurate now? Does that mean the machines we used before are less accurate? What is that all about? Look, I am a republican and for the most part I want republicans to be in control of this country, but I don't want to cheat over it. I want the election to be fair.


--
Thanks
F Vernon Green

_______________________________________________

members mailing list

EMAIL:PROTECTED

http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members