Re: The Big Gamble on Electronic Voting

From: Jerry Lobdill <lobdillj_at_charter_dot_net>
Date: Wed Sep 27 2006 - 07:41:58 CDT

At 10:30 AM 9/25/2006, September 24, 2006
  Digital Domain
   The Big Gamble on Electronic Voting By RANDALL STROSS
wrote:
>Manual audits of the tallies in at least 1 percent of all precincts,
>as is now required in California, would provide a transparent method
>of checking for integrity. Should a full recount be necessary, the
>paper ballots, containing only the selected names, provide
>unambiguous records of original intent.

This statement is false and has been recognized as false by most
researchers involved in election audit design.

This is a fly that we have to swat every time it comes up, because
among those who have not been involved in election audit design
research this myth is breeding rapidly. Once it reaches a certain
population size it will become accepted lore.

Jerry Lobdill

_______________________________________________
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 Sat Sep 30 23:17:07 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Sep 30 2006 - 23:17:08 CDT