Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines

2008-10-02 Thread Raph Frank
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 12:00 PM, James Gilmour [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here in Scotland there is a somewhat hidden debate that must be had. STV-PR was introduced for local government elections in 2007. The counting rules adopted (Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method for consequential

Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines

2008-10-02 Thread Terry Bouricius
Ralph wrote: This can be solved by just publishing the ballot images. This way everyone can work out their own result. Note that in Burlington (Vermont, USA), all of the ranked ballot images (text file, not graphical images, unfortunately) are posted on the Internet after the election, along

Re: [EM] the 'who' and the 'what' - trying again

2008-10-02 Thread Dave Ketchum
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 19:52:31 -0400 Michael Allan wrote: Dave Ketchum wrote: Cycles happen, and perhaps should be reported, but are NOT a reason for he system to do anything special beyond normal analysis and reporting. Of course reporting should e based on total voting, thus updated as soon

Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines

2008-10-02 Thread Kathy Dopp
James, Nice sales piece for electronic ballot rigging machines that fails to mention that it is impossible to ensure that e-votes are not tampered with. Here is a great film done by graduate students at the University of California, Santa Barbara in their Computer Security Group who show how