Re: Brand new concept in audit trails

From: Ed Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Wed May 04 2005 - 22:27:15 CDT

Hello David:

I'm not sure I've ever seen a device that slits paper along the lines
discussed below in my local office supply or computer technology store. Nor
can you just stroll into Staples and get preperforated paper that runs
through typical printers as far as I know. Sure you can take the paper to a
good print job shop and have them preperforate it, but what a hassle. I
know. I've worked as a printer. Why not two printers? Ink jet printers
are so damm cheap that you could just about throw them away after the
election.

-- 
Thanks, Edmund R. Kennedy
Always work for the common good.
10777 Bendigo Cove
San Diego, CA 92126-2510
USA
I blog now and then at: <http://ekennedyx.blogspot.com/>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Mertz" <voting-project@gnosis.cx>
To: "Open Voting Consortium discussion list" <ovc-discuss@listman.sonic.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Brand new concept in audit trails
> 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.
>
> 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...
>
> ---
> Keeping medicines from the bloodstreams of the sick; food
> from the bellies of the hungry; books from the hands of the
> uneducated; technology from the underdeveloped; and putting
> advocates of freedom in prisons.  Intellectual property is
> to the 21st century what the slave trade was to the 16th.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to 
> arthur@openvotingconsortium.org 
_______________________________________________
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