[E-voting] Minimum requirement to juge voting "technology"

[Timothy Murphy]

On Friday 10 September 2004 17:03, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:

> But do you have a proposal, and indication, an idea, anything in fact
> which would aid someone to discern between what is a reasonable request
> and what isnt?

I've already answered that question -
I would leave it to the person in charge of the election 
(maybe the Returning Officer),
with anyone having the right to appeal to a court
if they felt aggrieved.

> In an election where candidate A gets 1600 votes, and candidate B gets
> 1400, how I guess whether tampering or error is likely or not?

Political activists usually have a pretty good idea
of how candidates are going to do,
eg from exit polls and from the response to canvassing.
If a candidate from one party did noticeably worse in one constituency
that the party did nationwide,
it would be reasonable to enquire why this was so,
and if there was no apparent reason
then the paper votes should be counted.

Nb ICTE has won a battle but it hasn't won the war.
If you put forward a sceme that seems as cumbersome as the present system
then VVAT will be rejected by the political parties.

IMHO, the argument should be, "You only have to make one slight adjustment
to the present system, to print out the ballots.
Then you will have all the advantages of e-voting
and you will justify the expense of all these magnificent machines."


-- 
Timothy Murphy  
e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland