[E-voting] Re: terrorism and electronic elections

Marian Beddill beddill at nas.com
Tue Jul 12 04:25:55 IST 2005


Your statement is so close to my studied position - ( 
http://noleakybuckets.org/ )  thanks.

The electronic counting has value for STV methods and others similar, when 
applied over dispersed geographic regions, whose separate ballot-sets must 
be combined to obtain the result.  They CAN be hand-counted, then the sets 
re-distributed and re-counted - but the time needed and human resources to 
do so are significant, and the more handling - by ever larger pools of 
workers - the greater the opportunity for either errors or manipulation.

And, if this has any merit, electronic counting gives the media and the 
curious public a quicker answer.  I say that is a spurious "advantage", 
having just watched the US Presidential race in 2000 (~35 days) and the US 
Washington State Governor's race in 2004 (almost two months - more if you 
count the lawsuit.)

I'd happily wait for a solid trusted result.

Marian Beddill

At 7/11/2005  03:10 PM, you wrote:
>......it is extremely difficult for an electronic voting system to be 
>trustworthy unless it includes a paper-based voter-verifiable audit trail 
>(VVAT <http://wiki.politics.ie/index.php?title=VVAT&action=edit>). 
>http://wiki.politics.ie/index.php?title=Irish_Citizens_for_Trustworthy_E-Voting
>
>The more I know, the more concerns I have about including 
>electronics--..........
..........
>VVAT /plus/ mandatory hand count of all ballots would be close to 
>acceptable, if I felt sure that the hand count wouldn't eventually be 
>dispensed with.  (If you've got a mandatory hand count, why bother with 
>the electronics at all?  Just a huge unnecessary ongoing expenditure that 
>has no true intrinsic benefits and risks losing everything.)
>
>Catherine




More information about the E-voting mailing list