Re: Observing process in Placer County CA 4th CD -- Brown v. McClintock

From: Ronald Crane <voting_at_lastland_dot_net>
Date: Tue Nov 11 2008 - 12:46:04 CST

Alan Dechert wrote:
> ...2) If we are going to have absentee voting, the ballot should be
> machine printed like the OVC pollsite system (we need to develop a
> system to transmit a form electronically for the remote voter to make
> selections and print the ballot). Optical scan systems are not too
> bad when employed at the pollsite since they can catch anomalies like
> overvotes and stray marks. But you run a significant portion of
> hand-marked ballots though the postal system, you're going to end up
> with a bunch of screwed up ballots. This is not a big problem for
> contests won by a large margin, but when you get under 1/2 of one
> percent (like our congressional race), you have a problem.
I'm not sure I understand this proposal. If it is for voters to print
machine-filled ballots on their home printers, it opens the door to all
of the attacks inherent in polling-place e-voting, and then adds the
internet hazards of viruses, network stack vulnerabilities, social
engineering attacks, and the like.

-R
_______________________________________________
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 Nov 30 23:17:15 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Nov 30 2008 - 23:17:22 CST