Fireslide wrote:If by works well you mean. "We got a majority of the votes so we should assume that the voters want all our policies." Rather than, "We got the majority of votes, but 90% of our voters don't want x or y"
revengous wrote:having an electronic voting system would also remove the chance of a person 'hanging' a vote.
The first step to this process would be to replace the paper with a machine - keep the recording of voters on the books and just have them step into a booth with a machine.
your idea is good but it would need to be very user friendly, its not just it literate people voting here - you have all ages etc
André Axe'm wrote:Touchscreens at the polling booths.
Less of a security risk, quicker for counting.
Marius wrote:I'd have security concerns...
No matter how robust digital data is made, it's always vulnerable. But it's very, very hard to change the results of a paper election. It takes way too much work to alter millions of paper votes, and there's always a trail.
And however robust a digital system could be made, we'd always be having debates about it at election time, so the resources formerly spent on slowly counting votes would instead be funneled into debates about security. Not much of a win.
The biggest security issue with paper elections is the design of the voting papers, because it can put the overall results into the hands of one person (the person who designs the forms). I know of one case (the Bush election) where this was a serious issue... but that's the only security-type risk that I can really think of.
Users browsing this forum: Makena and 3 guests