4 ms·

I'm sorry I'm not going to read your essay. I'll respond to your first point about "pandemic triggered fuckery" by pointing out that the things I mentioned have

I'm sorry I'm not going to read your essay. I'll respond to your first point about "pandemic triggered fuckery" by pointing out that the things I mentioned have been occuring for decades. I understand you're proud of Oregon but voting by mail will never be more secure than voting in person. There is no way to verify the identity of who actually mailed the ballot. In person someones identity and eligibility can be verified.

ddingus 5y ago
Decades? With Vote By Mail? Where? And I am completely sincere. The pandemic efforts were a mess. Rushed, among other things. As for identity and eligibility, it is clear you have not actually taken the time to understand much of this as it has been done, and tested, for years. Non issue. I have been active in voting advocacy and activism since the late 90's. Have been cited in policy papers a few times related to the inherent untrustworthy nature of all known electronic voting systems that do not personally identify voters. In person voting is great! We do need to clean up obvious manipulations in some States, but if that is the decision, I am fine with it because it works. VBM also works, and like in person, some places could use a clean up pass. Where electronic voting is being considered, I always make sure VBM and the Oregon implementation are a part of the discussion because a clear move to change without it means electronic voting gets in easily. South Carolina has not known who won an election there for a long time, over a decade due to the use of paperless touch screen voting. They recently went to paper, but still have a whole lot of problems. Frankly, the strongest VBM argument is the well distributed votes cast making it impossible to bias with lack of machines and polls. There are no 8 hour voting queues in poor districts, for just one very notable metric in favor. I will end with the stats disproving your assertion. Like I said, name a metric and VBM outperforms consistently. In theory, I will not disagree with you. In real world outcomes, the US currently and largely fails the Carter Standards, always where electronic voting is in use, and a lot of the time where in person voting is used. And those failures boil down to shady voter roll tactics, caging, challenges at polling places and discrimination in both the number and accessibility of polling sites. But hey! So long as you aren't an electronic voting advocate, it is all good with me. Either, implemented well can execute democracy. And they coexist. Easy peasy. VBM will continue to garner share as more people vote using by mail options that exist today. Early and absentee mainly. They spread the word nicely enough.
ddingus 5y ago
Side bar: no need to apologize Passersby do read. You might as well be secure in how you want to play it. Those same passersby will see, "did not read..." You may want to apologize to them. No worries here.

ddingus 5y ago

Decades? With Vote By Mail? Where? And I am completely sincere. The pandemic efforts were a mess. Rushed, among other things. As for identity and eligibility, it is clear you have not actually taken the time to understand much of this as it has been done, and tested, for years. Non issue. I have been active in voting advocacy and activism since the late 90's. Have been cited in policy papers a few times related to the inherent untrustworthy nature of all known electronic voting systems that do not personally identify voters. In person voting is great! We do need to clean up obvious manipulations in some States, but if that is the decision, I am fine with it because it works. VBM also works, and like in person, some places could use a clean up pass. Where electronic voting is being considered, I always make sure VBM and the Oregon implementation are a part of the discussion because a clear move to change without it means electronic voting gets in easily. South Carolina has not known who won an election there for a long time, over a decade due to the use of paperless touch screen voting. They recently went to paper, but still have a whole lot of problems. Frankly, the strongest VBM argument is the well distributed votes cast making it impossible to bias with lack of machines and polls. There are no 8 hour voting queues in poor districts, for just one very notable metric in favor. I will end with the stats disproving your assertion. Like I said, name a metric and VBM outperforms consistently. In theory, I will not disagree with you. In real world outcomes, the US currently and largely fails the Carter Standards, always where electronic voting is in use, and a lot of the time where in person voting is used. And those failures boil down to shady voter roll tactics, caging, challenges at polling places and discrimination in both the number and accessibility of polling sites. But hey! So long as you aren't an electronic voting advocate, it is all good with me. Either, implemented well can execute democracy. And they coexist. Easy peasy. VBM will continue to garner share as more people vote using by mail options that exist today. Early and absentee mainly. They spread the word nicely enough.

ddingus 5y ago

Side bar: no need to apologize Passersby do read. You might as well be secure in how you want to play it. Those same passersby will see, "did not read..." You may want to apologize to them. No worries here.