Re: Ballots for elections with many races

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 17:24:14 CDT

At 3:16 PM -0700 4/27/04, Arthur Keller wrote:
>At 5:42 PM -0400 4/27/04, David Mertz wrote:
>>I spoke with new OVC subscriber Kevin McDermott last night. He
>>raised the issue of elections--like those apparently held in Cook
>>County, IL--with a very large number of contests in them.
>>Specifically, elections might contain Yes/No votes for a hundred
>>different Judges, who are all subject to confidence votes.
>>The current ballots deal nicely with cases like the California
>>Special Gubernatorial contest with a large number of candidates.
>>130 people ran for Governor, but an OVC ballot would only need to
>>print the name of the one candidate a voter wishes to vote for.
>>Nice and compact on the paper (though navigating the GUI or RII is
>>more time-consuming with all those candidates).
>>But I don't see how 100 Judicial Confidence votes can fit on one
>>piece of paper. Maybe with a really small font. Or a creative use
>>of space that e.g. groups together the Yes, No, and No Preference
>>Judges within different boxes on the ballot. But overly creative
>>typography and layout makes voter verification less simple and
>>reliable. So do we just spill over to as many pages as are needed?
>>Is it legal to only record the relatively rare "No confidence"
>>votes, and just leave off the usual "Yes" or "No Preference" votes?
>>What does the wisdom of the OVC opine on this matter?
>The notion that the entire ballot should fit on one screen is
>something that was needed for a quick demo.

Oops, I misread this. The printed ballot should fit on one page; the
user interface need not. Too little sleep.


Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Fri Apr 30 23:17:19 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT