[ExI] Immaculate Election

[spike at rainier66.com]

> On Behalf Of Brent Allsop via extropy-chat
…

 

 

Great post, Brent, thanks.

 

 

>…Here is a table from that MIT paper posted by Stuart:

 



 

>…This table is completely backwards.  The paper ballots are the ones that are not "Voter-verifiable", simply because that is too inefficient.  No one voter can count all the paper ballots….

 

No one voter must count all the paper ballots.  We can have armies of volunteers doing that.  They can be double counted: a bin is counted, recorded, volunteers take that bin to another table at random, never having eyes of several volunteers taken off of that bin, counted again elsewhere, bin taken to storage with volunteer witnesses after second counting, the two results compared, if they agree, then those totals are recorded and that bin is moved to long term storage.

 

This is so simple, I am really surprised no one has thought of it.  Oh wait, that’s how it was done before voting machines came along, creating dangerous doubt in the minds of the voters that the system is flawed.

 

At the state level where elections are controlled, we could have a movement to true the vote.  The good guys want a true reliable election, so the good guys will embrace the notion, and there ya go: bipartisan and nearly unanimous support for truing the vote.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20210112/d10372fb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 31778 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20210112/d10372fb/attachment.png>