> I don't agree. The amount of damage ... It wasn't a statement about the amount of relative damage. It was a statement that a voting system that leaks privac

> I don't agree. The amount of damage ... It wasn't a statement about the amount of relative damage. It was a statement that a voting system that leaks privacy beyond the polling station strictly increases the number of parties capable of coercion vs. a voting system that only requires securing the polling stations. There's a big "if" in trusting the government to run honest polling stations (and keep phones/cameras/etc. out). That's not in question. However, if a blockchain voting system leaks voter privacy, then random online criminals halfway around the globe with no capability of controlling polling stations can still coerce voters without needing to physically control even a single polling station. Electronic voting done right can be a force for good and transparency, but getting privacy right is absolutely critical. If you screw up privacy, you enormously increase the number of adversaries you need to worry about.