2 ms·
Eliminating the ultimate privacy of the voting booth has potentially serious negative consequences, like attempts to influence elections via intimidation or bri
by twoodfin 11y ago
Eliminating the ultimate privacy of the voting booth has potentially serious negative consequences, like attempts to influence elections via intimidation or bribery ("Show us your vote for Smith and it's worth $100 to you. If you don't, remember we know where you live...") There are a variety of clever schemes that work around this, but none of them are as simple as you getting to bring home a certified copy of your ballot.
- elif 11y agoI would sooner welcome a president distributing $6.5 billion dollars ($100 * winning vote count 2012) to normal people than have to suspend rationality and instead have faith in every actor capable of manipulating votes (of which I feel there are many). If you honestly believe there is nothing any candidate can offer you which is worth more than $100, I propose you should be allowed to take that deal. ( Of course, completely open source hardware and software is the real solution. ) EDIT: I am a little bitter because I'm in a state using machines which don't even keep a paper trail to begin with. https://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/ https://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/