Re: Consensus of the OVC

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 13:58:01 CDT

> Let's separate out the issue of large screen from full-face voting.
> One can use a large screen without full-face voting. One can have a
> multi-contest display with any size screen. Minimizing page turns
> could mean a multi-contest display; it does not necessarily mean
> full-face voting.
> For example, we could display a collection of judicial races on one
> screen (in one column!), rather than including those races along with
> contests for President and cat-catcher.

When I refer to full-face voting--and I think I speak for Alan here
too--I don't really mean that every contest appears on one screen, no
matter what. Obviously, we're not going to fit 80 contests on one 17"
screen (nor even on a 19" screen). For purposes of this discussion,
there is a continuum between (A) Fitting as much as is legible on each
ballot screen, thereby minimizing page turns (often fitting on one
screen, but not always); (B) Restricting each screen to exactly one
contest, thereby focusing voter attention on the contest (perhaps with
some navigation/progress widgets on the same screen).

Arthur's suggestion of putting a collection of judicial confirmations
on the same screen moves in the (A) direction, but just a bit; it could
still present all multi-candidate contests one-per-page.

There is SOME relation between screen size and the A/B axis. They are
not equivalent, but the following implications hold:

* IF we aim for full-face voting, THEN we need large(r) monitors

* IF we present full-paragraph proposals, THEN we need large(r) monitors
==================================================================
= 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 23:18:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:17 CDT