[E-voting] VVAT and the australian ballot.

Cian pooka at redbrick.dcu.ie
Tue Jul 13 12:22:46 IST 2004

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 11:56:02AM +0100, Ryan Meade wrote:
> Are we having our first holy war?  I know it's been quiet
> lately, but let's try to keep it together.
Heh, the internet is a very combustible medium. I, too, call for a little
moderation of language and tone. Think of the children.

With regard to the whole VVAT thing, I understand that the term has been heavily
linked to DRE machines in the debate so far. However, it really doesn't (or
shouldn't?) refer to Mercuri-type systems alone - for example, we've often
talked about how Optical Scan systems have an inbuilt VVAT, in that the ballot
itself is the audit trail (verified by the voter themselves as their vote).

Similarly, the Australian ballot can be said to have an inbuilt VVAT; see
Adrian's "Lies, Damn Lies, and Six Independent Consultancies", Untruth 8:


Also have a read of some of Douglas Jones' stuff on auditing elections:


He has other (excellent) articles on the Australian ballot (which he considers
a very sophisticated system, considering its vintage) on his voting page:


Rebecca Mercuri doesn't actually mention the Australian ballot, but I think her
definition certainly includes it (although she now refers to VVPBs rather than
VVATs due to serious problems she had with people trying to warp the term - I
guess we had that too):


Anyhow, it's important that we agree on terms, of course, but I suggest we do
it with less inflammatory and polemical language. ;o)


       "Metaphors are wondrous candles which illuminate the hidden
             connections between things." -- Jonah Goldberg

More information about the E-voting mailing list