> I find the online voting part convenient, but I'm afraid people will not trust it because they cannot understand it. Forget about having a trustworthy system

> I find the online voting part convenient, but I'm afraid people will not trust it because they cannot understand it. Forget about having a trustworthy system: regardless of mathematical proofs or observers or anything else you can come up with, many people will not trust the election system after last time. You need a system that helps take into account this lack of trust. Regardless of the voting system, one potential big missing ingredient IMO is individual auditability, and I don't mean the ability by a state to perform a "recount" that could be just as flawed or rigged as the original count. There should arguably be a private method using cryptography where citizens should be able to individually privately verify that their vote was registered, and to see that their votes counted towards their intended candidate. People should be able to do this instantly and repeatedly after any vote cast. If you have 84 people who say their vote was registered wrong after a state election, maybe you chalk it up to user error and somebody choosing the wrong field. But if you have tens of thousands of people for one party come out in a state after an election and sign some legal document that says that they checked and their vote wasn't registered or went to the wrong candidate, you'd at least know there's likely some big flaw somewhere in the system. Of course, even this doesn't guarantee an accurate election because votes could always be manufactured out of thin air using fake people and that's where things like observers might help, but at least you can largely deal with the issue of votes being changed with an individual audit system.