Re: Voting Stations

From: Ed Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Thu May 06 2004 - 20:55:28 CDT

Hello Again Alan:

            Are you sure you read the text at the Australian site recently? For your convenience a portion is below. The bolding is my own.

For the voting system:
  a.. standard PCs each with a keypad and barcode reader connected to an isolated LAN at each Polling Centre
  b.. one PC also with a larger screen plus headphones as an aid to visually impaired voters
  c.. a server with two hard disk drives and a removable media drive
A demonstration of the voting system was provided on a standalone machine at each Polling Centre (see image).
For the data entry system:

  a.. standard PCs connected to a server
For the counting system:
  a.. a server with a removable media drive
  b.. an A3 Postscript Printer
====================

They don't seem to have printers in there anywhere.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Dechert" <alan@openvotingconsortium.org>
To: <voting-project@lists.sonic.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [voting-project] Voting Stations

> Ed,
>
> > However, it looks like your design presupposes LCD or
> > similar monitors. I know most people now expect to
> > see a monitor in front of them but I suppose it could
> > be studied as an alternative. .......
> >
> Horizontal orientation is good for voter privacy. What I have drawn is not
> too unlike the screen orientation of some commercial systems.
>
> I don't really presuppose LCD. The sketch I made could also work CRT where
> the table has a hole for the monitor to be mounted. However, over time, I
> think it's clear that screens will be flat panel LCDs. Most new systems
> come with them.
>
> > Also, the kiosks in my
> > branch library are pretty hefty items so that might
> > not be the best model if you're looking for light
> > weight. Now that I've through about it for a little
> > while, I'm dropping the requirement for a curtain
> > except for booths made for the wheel chair bound. I
> > hate to make a 'special' booth for the disabled on
> > general principles of mainlining but that's my
> > problem. It still might be good to have 6-12" 'wings'
> > sticking out on each side of a booth for privacy.
> >
> Right. These could be cardboard... whatever works.
>
> > However, I do have heartburn with your printer
> > placement. At the very least, it needs some sort of
> > cage around it to keep people from trying to vandalize
> > it.
> >
> I don't know if that's worth it. The HP 1300 can be had for $300 (very
> rugged high-quality laser). Other pretty good laser printers can be had for
> $150 - 200. A good cage might cost quite a bit and be a big hassle. I
> don't know how big a problem polling place vandalism might be. I don't see
> this as a big issue and one axiom would be to have at least one replacement
> printer available incase of some problem.
>
> > Also, on a related note, I was just looking at
> > ink jet printers when I realized that one of the
> > challenges was that they only hold about 200 or so
> > sheets of paper at a time. At full capacity at the
> > polling place, how many people an hour would use an
> > EVM? In other words, if a vendor decided to use ink
> > jet printers how many times a day might each printer
> > have to be refilled with paper? Similarly, a laser
> > printer usually holds 500 sheets.
> >
> Again, I'm glad you're thinking these things through but this topic has been
> gone over quite a bit. The average number of ballots per polling place is
> about 500 for a general election (think 100 million divided by 200,000
> polling places). Seven machines would mean an average of about 70 ballots
> printed. Add something for tests, spoiled ballots, etc. ... say 100. Even
> doubling that for a good safety margin and figure 200. The HP 1300 can hold
> 250 sheets. So if it's filled at the beginning of Election Day, there
> should be no need to refill. Even if you have to refill in some rare cases,
> this can be taken care of by having a ream of paper on hand. This is not
> really a big issue.
>
> It does become a little bit of an issue if heaver stock is required. I
> don't see ever needing to go to card stock, but something inbetween card
> stock and plain paper might be considered. Still should not be a big issue.
>
> > I found the Australian site pretty interesting.
> > However I noticed that that they were using a LAN, a
> > server and perhaps only one printer. I didn't think
> > we were doing that. I get the impression that there
> > was an actual internal structure that was holding the
> > cardboard up. The problem of dealing with weight and
> > security seals doesn't come up or at least isn't
> > discussed in the site you've mentioned. I know that
> > the actual booth could be handled with cardboard
> > cylinders and such but I think a 'normal' pc cpu would
> > need to sit on the floor.
> >
> The monitor is held up by a cardboard structure. Probably the CPU is on the
> floor.
> f
> This is not necessarily the way the Aussies do it now. The picture is from
> a small pilot. I know the software has been reworked a couple of times
> since then. Also given the talk about paperless voting issues, they are now
> talking like maybe they should have a printer. I don't know how widespread
> the eVACS system is being used--not very widely I think.
>
> > What do you think?
> >
> Need to be real cheap and real simple.
>
> Alan D.
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:21 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT