3 ms·

> Voting must be done in a publicly visible manner (and yet, the ballot should remain secret) so that there is provably no coercion. There can certainly be coe

> Voting must be done in a publicly visible manner (and yet, the ballot should remain secret) so that there is provably no coercion. There can certainly be coercion even in countries that maintain secret ballots. In Russian regions, it is not unheard of for civil servants and teachers to be told by their superiors that they must vote the favoured party “or else”, and a mobile phone picture of their ballot might be demanded as proof that they did so.

chopin 9y ago
Which is why it is forbidden in many countries to take such pictures. Hadn't there been a scandal with Trumps son-in-law (or son maybe) who posted a picture of his ballot?
- relix 9y ago
  You think because it's illegal, it'll stop people that are being coerced?
  - chopin 9y ago
    In Germany, we have roughly this system (and I think that it is similar in US): the voting boxes are some rather tiny cardboard boxes which can be seen by the people running the election, they are rather open. You would need to be pretty sneaky to take pictures. As well, in Germany phones tend to not be able to switch off the clicking sound of the camera. If I am able enough to tweak my stuff to take such a picture I'd be surely able enough to provide a fake picture. The attacker would need to provide the device which in turn does not scale very well. So, apart form husbands, this attack would not make much sense. If that was to be done in scale, it'd be noticed fast. And people would ask questions quickly. That might be different for Russia, I admit. In US, no need for all that, you have electronic voting boxes, which are completely opaque to voters and counters. EDIT: spelling.
- wu-ikkyu 9y ago
  It doesn't matter if it's forbidden to take pictures if it's done in private
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
msl 9y ago
So take the picture, dispose of the ballot and get a new one from the election officials. Fill the new one with your own choice, get it stamped and put it into the ballot box. A bit of a hassle to be sure, but it does not exactly derail democracy.
- relix 9y ago
  The coercer can stand outside the window looking in, or somewhere nearby, to check that you don't go take a new one.
  - celticninja 9y ago
    Hardly scales.
    - ngrilly 9y ago
      LOL
  - sigstoat 9y ago
    nobody not-voting allowed in the actual-voting portion of my local polling areas, and windows were covered over, as i recall. whatever increasingly convoluted suggestion you'll make next probably doesn't work either.
    - relix 9y ago
      You're already coercing people into voting your way. It'll be peanuts to coerce a person who works in the polling areas to jot down who came to ask for a ballot twice. I also don't appreciate your arrogance in trying to shut down this discussion pre-emptively. Maybe try listening more in the future, you might discover interesting things even if they don't agree with your pre-set ideas.
      - msl 9y ago
        The officials "represent" different different parties. They keep eye on one another, so anyone keeping a personal list of voters would probably be caught quite easily. Besides, the last time I voted, the ballots were handed out at the entrance - long before anyone wanted to know who I am.

chopin 9y ago

Which is why it is forbidden in many countries to take such pictures. Hadn't there been a scandal with Trumps son-in-law (or son maybe) who posted a picture of his ballot?

relix 9y ago
You think because it's illegal, it'll stop people that are being coerced?
- chopin 9y ago
  In Germany, we have roughly this system (and I think that it is similar in US): the voting boxes are some rather tiny cardboard boxes which can be seen by the people running the election, they are rather open. You would need to be pretty sneaky to take pictures. As well, in Germany phones tend to not be able to switch off the clicking sound of the camera. If I am able enough to tweak my stuff to take such a picture I'd be surely able enough to provide a fake picture. The attacker would need to provide the device which in turn does not scale very well. So, apart form husbands, this attack would not make much sense. If that was to be done in scale, it'd be noticed fast. And people would ask questions quickly. That might be different for Russia, I admit. In US, no need for all that, you have electronic voting boxes, which are completely opaque to voters and counters. EDIT: spelling.
wu-ikkyu 9y ago
It doesn't matter if it's forbidden to take pictures if it's done in private

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

msl 9y ago

So take the picture, dispose of the ballot and get a new one from the election officials. Fill the new one with your own choice, get it stamped and put it into the ballot box. A bit of a hassle to be sure, but it does not exactly derail democracy.

relix 9y ago
The coercer can stand outside the window looking in, or somewhere nearby, to check that you don't go take a new one.
- celticninja 9y ago
  Hardly scales.
  - ngrilly 9y ago
    LOL
- sigstoat 9y ago
  nobody not-voting allowed in the actual-voting portion of my local polling areas, and windows were covered over, as i recall. whatever increasingly convoluted suggestion you'll make next probably doesn't work either.
  - relix 9y ago
    You're already coercing people into voting your way. It'll be peanuts to coerce a person who works in the polling areas to jot down who came to ask for a ballot twice. I also don't appreciate your arrogance in trying to shut down this discussion pre-emptively. Maybe try listening more in the future, you might discover interesting things even if they don't agree with your pre-set ideas.
    - msl 9y ago
      The officials "represent" different different parties. They keep eye on one another, so anyone keeping a personal list of voters would probably be caught quite easily. Besides, the last time I voted, the ballots were handed out at the entrance - long before anyone wanted to know who I am.