Re: Another question: do we want machine-marked ballots for everybody?

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Tue May 26 2009 - 00:11:22 CDT

At 6:45 PM -0700 5/25/09, Joe wrote:
>How about instead of machine marks, you have two poll workers thumb
>print each official ballot so there is a wet ink print. This would
>authenticate the document beyond question.
>
>maybe you could have a timestamp below the thumbprint.

Joe, ballots are supposed to be anonymous (not traceable to an
individual), except for provisional ballots in limited circumstances.
Once it is determined a vote-by-mail ballot is to be counted, it
should be removed from the envelope without examination and placed in
a pile of ballots to be processed.

Also recording the order in which voters appear is considered illegal
in many jurisdictions.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experienced advisor to leading edge startups and
accomplished expert witness on patent infringement cases.
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
By sending email to the OVC-discuss  list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at  http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Sun May 31 23:17:06 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun May 31 2009 - 23:17:07 CDT