[sudoroom] A call to hackers everywhere

[Eddan Katz]

Foul play has a long history in elections, and with paper too. But that's a different point.

Do you think the voter should receive the paper receipt or that a paper receipt is printed out but kept at the voting location. If kept at the location, should the voter be able to review the printed copy before it is dropped into whatever box or container holds the paper trail votes?

I learned that this turns out to be a crucial question for the blind advocates for voting rights, for whom electronic voting machines make it possible for them to vote for the first time in private and without any assistance. This issue in fact caused a major rift between traditional voting rights advocates and the digital rights community that I think is still yet to be repaired. Only after intensive coalition building efforts did groups like the NAACP, traditionally concerned about voting rights, finally came around to the digital rights criticism of EVMs.

I would be interested in trying to work out a more nuanced position that can satisfy both the computer scientists and the blind community concerns. That seems like a very worthwhile Sudo Room project to me.

-Eddan

On Nov 15, 2012, at 7:26 PM, Jehan Tremback <jehan.tremback at gmail.com> wrote:

> IMO, voting should not be done with out a paper trail. Preferably by hand. It's not that hard to color in little bubbles that a computer can read. If the ballots are unclear, then they should be redesigned. If some portion are unreadable by computer, they can be analyzed by humans.
> 
> It's way too important of a process to be handled by the easily hackable, untested machines, made by members of one party or another. If there is foul play in a paper election, at least there is clear evidence (or evidence of destruction of evidence) to fall back on. With an electronic ballot, there is nothing. 
> 
> -Jehan