Re: Voting with digital pen

From: Charlie Strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Mon May 21 2007 - 11:34:44 CDT

On May 21, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Keith wrote:

> It's ambiguous, Is the pen mark or the anoto location the vote of
> record ?

Well I see it as like a paper ballot read by opscan. Or an OVC
summary ballot scaned by wand. the paper ballot is the ballot. the
opscan or wand is the data entry. Can the data entry be flawed? Yes.
Could any number of downstream data processing steps be flawed too?
yes. Are any of theose subsequent data bases and computer files the
Ballot? no. In all cases the paper ballot is the ballot. Or so I
would hold.

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ovc-discuss-bounces+k=copetech.com@listman.sonic.net
> [mailto:ovc-discuss-bounces+k=copetech.com@listman.sonic.net] On
> Behalf Of
> Charlie Strauss
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 9:19 AM
> To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
> Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Voting with digital pen
>
> Y'know OVC should VERY seriously consider this pen idea.
>
> Here's a thought on how this could be incorporated into the OVC
> paradigm.
>
> 1) user marks a conventional paper ballot with the electronic pen.
> 2) user then runs the edge of the ballot through an edge marker like
> you see in all the super markets check out counters when they process
> a paper check. (it bar codes the check)
>
> 3) user can, if worried, rescan the bar code to see what's there.
>
> 4) user deposits the ballot or discards it.
>
> this retains most of the virtues of the OVC system while gaining the
> virtues of the paper ballot.
> e.g. visually parallel rather than serial access to marking the races.
>
> it could be used along side the regular touchscreen OVC system,
> though of course there would be noticeable differences in the ballots
> produced by the hand and printed methods--would not be worse than the
> status quo using automarks for handicap access.
>
> The major stumble might be the added step of having the user edge
> mark the ballot. What if they skipped that step? Well this is not
> really a crisis because in the OVC system the election judges do a
> hand scan of all the ballots. Any that are not edgemarked could be
> marked after the fact then scanned. (and it would be even harder for
> the judges to "cheat" since any ballot they create must pair with one
> stored in the pen, just like the current OVC system does in the
> reconciliation step).
>
> Lastly if recounts are to be done one could also use the original
> marked squares to do the recounts since they are encoded for easy
> readout.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 21, 2007, at 7:15 AM, Jan Karrman wrote:
>
>> ..in Germany:
>>
>> http://fee.iavoss.org/2006/papers/fee-2006-iavoss-New-Generation-of-
>> Voting-Machines-in-Germany.pdf
>>
>> /Jan
>> _______________________________________________
>> OVC-discuss mailing list
>> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

_______________________________________________
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 Thu May 31 23:17:04 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 31 2007 - 23:17:05 CDT