Re: R: Re: CHAT (POLITICS!!!): Putting the duh in Florida

> Date:         Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:43:13 -0500
> From:         John Cowan <jcowan@...>
> Nik Taylor wrote:
> > Hmmm ... how many counters do you have?  Personally, I think we should
> > go electronic.  Electronic voting machines are more accurate, and have
> > less chance of accidental invalidation (i.e., people voting for two
> > different people), and count instantly.
>
> Except when they decide to reboot themselves and ignore the first 350+
> people who voted.
Which is quite likely since most of the software running on the box
will be made in Redmond --- NT4 or W95 are common choices because it's
near impossible to get programmers who can do anything worthwhile
without the crutch of Visual C++ (or Visual anything else).

> Electronic machines that don't make a hard-copy backup of what they are
> doing in real time are a very *bad* idea.
Indeed. And Internet voting is an even worse idea --- all the schemes
I've seen will either allow undected fraud or leave a trail so a bent
government can find out what people voted.

Collecting up other subthreads here: In Denmark, paper ballots and B2
pencils are mandated by law. You get sent a voter card by mail, and
exchange that for a ballot at the polling place. (Where you're asked
for your birthday, so you can't easily use a card that you steal out
of the mail, for instance).

Each polling place is staffed by local volunteers nominated by all
registered political parties. They do a first count on the night, only
counting party votes, and phone the results in to the MoI; next day
they count again, sorting out votes for individual candidate and
correcting any mistakes in the party totals.

That result normally stands, but the ballots are sent off to the MoI.
If something turns out to depend on a very fine margin, the relevant
ballots can be counted very thoroughly at the ministry. At the last
election, there was a change to the list of MPs something like 3 weeks
after election day. (I think number 3 on a major party list in one
part of Jutland got in instead of number 3 from the same party in
another part of Jutland. In any case it was only important to the two
candidates themselves).

Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)