3 ms·

Problem is you are incentivizing people to sell their vote or to threaten others to vote a specific way (abusive spouse wants to verify their SO voted a certain

Problem is you are incentivizing people to sell their vote or to threaten others to vote a specific way (abusive spouse wants to verify their SO voted a certain way). The only info we should provide electronically is that your vote was counted at all. Direct value verification would have to be done in person and under supervision.

leesalminen 4y ago
With widespread mail-in voting an abusive spouse could just fill in the ballot and drop it in the mailbox. No need to verify your spouse’s actions if you can just do it yourself.
- vkou 4y ago
  The relevant threat model isn't the abusive spouse who has physical access to your ballot, the relevant threat model is someone without physical access to your ballot being able to verify that you voted the way they wanted you to.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  This is clearly clueless In Russia all state employees, say school teachers, are told to vote the right way under no uncertain terms. But come the election day, and it is not physically possible to inspect what everyone is doing with paper ballots. If it was possible to digitally check voting, the regime would be even more repressive. If you have an abusive spouse, voting is your last problem.
- dmckeon 4y ago
  An interesting side-effect of universal mail-in ballots is the detection of fraudulent voter registrations. If ballots addressed to Tinker, Evers, and Chance arrive at 123 Elm Street, which is only occupied by the Smith family, one should reasonably assume shenanigans, if not felonies.
  - refurb 4y ago
    Not really. My friend who just recently moved got 4 mail in ballots sent to his place this last election, in addition to his own. Just people who never bothered to update their voter registration. Completed ballots are supposed to be verified by signature (at least in CA), but I have no idea how thorough this is. And I imagine if they are mail in, could they even find people who completed all 4 ballots, then dropped them in some random mail box? From what I gather they just reject a vote if they can't match signatures.

leesalminen 4y ago

With widespread mail-in voting an abusive spouse could just fill in the ballot and drop it in the mailbox. No need to verify your spouse’s actions if you can just do it yourself.

vkou 4y ago
The relevant threat model isn't the abusive spouse who has physical access to your ballot, the relevant threat model is someone without physical access to your ballot being able to verify that you voted the way they wanted you to.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
This is clearly clueless In Russia all state employees, say school teachers, are told to vote the right way under no uncertain terms. But come the election day, and it is not physically possible to inspect what everyone is doing with paper ballots. If it was possible to digitally check voting, the regime would be even more repressive. If you have an abusive spouse, voting is your last problem.
dmckeon 4y ago
An interesting side-effect of universal mail-in ballots is the detection of fraudulent voter registrations. If ballots addressed to Tinker, Evers, and Chance arrive at 123 Elm Street, which is only occupied by the Smith family, one should reasonably assume shenanigans, if not felonies.
- refurb 4y ago
  Not really. My friend who just recently moved got 4 mail in ballots sent to his place this last election, in addition to his own. Just people who never bothered to update their voter registration. Completed ballots are supposed to be verified by signature (at least in CA), but I have no idea how thorough this is. And I imagine if they are mail in, could they even find people who completed all 4 ballots, then dropped them in some random mail box? From what I gather they just reject a vote if they can't match signatures.