Quoting Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Evgeny Pinchuk wrote: > > Even an eye?! What are you gonna do, poke someone's eye out? :P
I'm just wondering if I'm missing something obvious here: why should the identification process be part of the voting process? In the manual voting, the two are separate - first you are identified and checked for uniqueness by the ballot committee, then you go behind the curtain and vote. If what stands behind the curtain is a voting machine, rather than a box with bits of paper, then it's electronic voting. The identification issue is different. Of course, there are still issues: you record the votes in random order so they cannot be identified with the order of visitors in the ballot. You have to make sure that each visitor only gets one chance to press the button. The source has to be made available to the public in order to ensure public trust, etc. But the identification issue has to be separate. Otherwise it violates the secrecy of voting. At most, you can replace the ballot committee with a biometrics machine, but it has to be a separate machine. And its separateness has to be transparent to the voter. Herouth ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
