I agree with this comment, except its feasibility. Non tech people do not trust tech, even if (unaffiliated) tech people assure them it's trustworthy. An exam

I agree with this comment, except its feasibility. Non tech people do not trust tech, even if (unaffiliated) tech people assure them it's trustworthy. An example: a poker room near me had electronic tables. They were fantastic--super fast deals, no miscounting, no acting out of turn, etc. But people thought they were rigged. For who? There's no obvious way for the table to pick favorites. Nobody thought there was a dial some guy could turn for his friend. They thought it was rigged for the house, to get the maximum rake more often. Nevermind that they get the maximum rake virtually every pot anyway, and introduce a huge risk. The guys knew me, knew I was in tech, and still didn't trust my opinion on it. Anyway the game died and the tables were taken away. We still don't have a local poker game, to my detriment. Even if the results were public and we ran analysis on them and found them to be legit, I think that would increase the average person's trust by 1-2%. They don't even understand the system. At least they can understand paper ballot voting. I think it would make the most sense to film all the sorting and counting, and make it publicly available. Then people can study it until they're content.