Re: Brand new concept in audit trails

From: Jim March <jmarch_at_prodigy_dot_net>
Date: Wed May 04 2005 - 22:17:41 CDT

David Mertz wrote:

> On May 4, 2005, at 7:31 PM, Ron Crane wrote:
>
>> Basically, if current law on the disclosure of *ballots* would permit
>> the carbon procedure, I hesitantly will accept it hesitantly
>> because of the minor-party coercion issues I listed earlier. If it
>> requires a change in current law, I'm going to have to see much
>> better justification for its use than I've seen so far.
>
>
> FWIW, I feel exactly the same as Ron about this. I am uneasy about
> revealing any statistical information on voters that is not legally
> required I don't want to try to -advance- a (new) system that creates
> new information leakage to partially reduce ballot anonymity. These
> channels might include minor party membership, correlation of votes in
> different contests, etc. (I bet the local small town sheriff knows
> which houses have the Green Party president signs; it doesn't take
> much to put the info together while looking at full ballots).
>
> However, if fully correlative cast ballots are currently part of open
> records laws--or in those jurisdictions where they are--Jim's ballot
> copy system seems to add auditing capability. If the ballots are
> accessible legally, there's no reason for that access to be more
> difficult or fragile than necessary.

Very true. Because if the info is available at all, the "political
elite" will get it first and those are the ones we'd be moderately
concerned about.

> As far as the physical technology goes, I certainly like Jim's current
> approach with a perforated sheet of paper (containing identical values
> on the two halves) better than messy carbon/NCR paper or dual
> printers. Perhaps the two halves (whether top/bottom or left/right)
> could contain some extra distinguishing mark--different
> watermark/background, or a stripe somewhere conspicuous on one, or
> different fonts, or something like that. That makes it simpler for
> poll workers to remember what goes where in the process.
>
> Yours, David...

Yeah...I've been thinking about this.

First, I'm assuming that the BEST printer would be a mono laser printer
for their reliability, but if we do inkjet we'd want mono too as the ink
modules are bigger.

If we're doing mono on white paper then...do a contunious border text of
"PUBLIC DISPLAY COPY" all around the outside of that half?

Jim
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:19 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT