[EM] Re: touch screen voting machines

[David GLAUDE]

Eron Lloyd wrote:

> I agree there is quite an amount of value in this traditional method. What I 
> was proposing was to use an electronic interface to produce a marked paper 
> ballot. This way, you have the multiple benefits of computer technology 
> (error correction, language selection, accessibility support, etc.) and the 
> confidence of a paper ballot result.

Error correction => Ask another ballot.
Language Selection => Provide translation in the voting area and for 
names, there is no need for translation.
Accessibility => Those that need help can choose someone to help or use 
proxy-vote.

> One of the biggest problems with *any* ballot is that often-times not much 
> usability research goes into it's design (like the recent Florida ballot). 
> One interesting offering a computer interface could provide is multiple ways 
> of displaying and inputing information about the ballot, based on the 
> preference of the user.

YES:
* make it more user friendly than paper.
* Let me choose my user interface (with random default):
** Win 3.1
** Win 95
** Win XP
** Gnome
** KDE
** X11
** Mac OS

Then do not forget to remember my preference for next election so that I 
don't have to setup the voting machine at each election. LoL

> Indeed there are many problems...I suppose what it boils down to is attempting 
> to reduce to ratio of correct to corrupt votes, so it can't swing an 
> election. And all of us volunteering at the polls as observers.

The nice thing about manual voting system (paper and pen) is that 
corrupt votes are also done at human scale and they go in every 
direction. Also it can be detected by witness.

The problem with e-voting is that e-fraud goes in a single direction at 
a computer scale with no possible proof or witness.

Being an observer durring an e-election is really not fun. I spended the 
day watching machine "faking"(?) to count the vote of the elector with 
no way to verify. I was just following the "procedure".

David GLAUDE