3 ms·

> every voter can assert that his/her votes are actually counted in the way they were made This isn't currently implemented in paper voting systems, why should

by ajuc 11y ago

> every voter can assert that his/her votes are actually counted in the way they were made This isn't currently implemented in paper voting systems, why should it count against electronic voting systems? Also 5 isn't implemented too well at the moment either. I think if you got printout with your vote identifier after voting, and then printouts with all the votes (secret identifier->vote) were available - peple could check if their vote was counted. In which way paper voting is more open or more secret than that?

majewsky 11y ago
Of course this is implemented in a paper voting system, if done right. When there are elections over here (in Germany), I can sit in the room all day and observe that the ballot box is empty at the beginning, every voter only votes once, and that votes are counted correctly at the end. When I did that last year, I also wrote down the totals and compared these to the published results for my electoral district.
- ajuc 11y ago
  OK, you are right that you can check more without trusting others with that system (with public votes/secret vote identifiers you can only check that your vote was counted). But you still have to trust other people because you can't be everywhere.
  - datenwolf 11y ago
    Well, assuming that observers attend the counts at all locations each observer can compare his local results with the officially published results for each location. If one mistrusting observer did this for each location, each and every single miscount would be immediately detected.
datenwolf 11y ago
Of course it is. In a paper vote you can mark your vote in a unique, distinguishable style; as long as it clearly shows your intention unambiguously and meets the elections constraints it must be counted. So after the vote closes you stay for the count, wait for the ballot with your particularly marked vote to be counted and assert that it gets counted the way you intended it.

by ajuc 11y ago

majewsky 11y ago

Of course this is implemented in a paper voting system, if done right. When there are elections over here (in Germany), I can sit in the room all day and observe that the ballot box is empty at the beginning, every voter only votes once, and that votes are counted correctly at the end. When I did that last year, I also wrote down the totals and compared these to the published results for my electoral district.

ajuc 11y ago
OK, you are right that you can check more without trusting others with that system (with public votes/secret vote identifiers you can only check that your vote was counted). But you still have to trust other people because you can't be everywhere.
- datenwolf 11y ago
  Well, assuming that observers attend the counts at all locations each observer can compare his local results with the officially published results for each location. If one mistrusting observer did this for each location, each and every single miscount would be immediately detected.

datenwolf 11y ago

Of course it is. In a paper vote you can mark your vote in a unique, distinguishable style; as long as it clearly shows your intention unambiguously and meets the elections constraints it must be counted. So after the vote closes you stay for the count, wait for the ballot with your particularly marked vote to be counted and assert that it gets counted the way you intended it.