Re: [EILeg] "dumb scanners"

From: Ronald Crane <voting_at_lastland_dot_net>
Date: Fri Dec 08 2006 - 13:18:35 CST

On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 00:06:49 -0800, Arthur Keller wrote
> At 11:52 AM -0800 12/7/06, Ronald Crane wrote:
> >But there needs to be only one "dumb scanner" (under officials' control) to
> >avoid invading privacy by scanning voters' fingerprints, ballot serial
> >numbers, etc. The "dumb scanner" can mis-scan in the same way as existing
> >all-in-one scanners, so we still need sampling hand audits. I'm not sure that
> >this approach solves much, but at least it appears to preserve privacy.
>
> Any system, including hand-counted paper ballots in precincts,
> requires sampling hand audits.

Agreed.

-R
_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sun Dec 31 23:17:09 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Dec 31 2006 - 23:17:16 CST