[LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing

David Goldstein wavey_one at yahoo.com
Wed Nov 15 21:19:52 AEDT 2006


My comments weren't and shouldn't have been taken to be directed towards Stewart. They were aimed at the argument in general.

David

----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Chirgwin <rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au>
To: link at anu.edu.au
Sent: Wednesday, 15 November, 2006 12:37:43 PM
Subject: Re: [LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing

David Goldstein wrote:
> For all the idiotic and paranoid comments on the issue of enabling people who are blind and vision impaired people to have access to electronic voting, it has been blindness agencies such as Vision Australia that have been advocating for electronic voting for people who are blind and vision impaired.
>   
David,

I can't see anything idiotic or paranoid in what Stewart Fist wrote 
below, and it's unnecessarily provocative to use those labels.

Electronic voting has not shown itself to meet any of the criteria 
necessary for an electoral system:

- Participation in all levels of the process: without expertise, you 
cannot examine the process (and in the case of proprietary software, you 
also need special permission to do so). This reduces the citizen's 
opportunity to take part in the electoral process.

- Transparency: e-voting is not transparent from ballot box to result.

- Scrutiny: you cannot scrutinise the returns of a black box.

- Secrecy: because the system is not transparent, there is no way for 
the individual citizen to guarantee the secrecy of their votes. I can 
only *know* that there's no association between my identity and my vote 
if I can understand the process.

All of these things are part of a democratic system, because they're 
fundamental to the integrity of the system: the less I can trust in, or 
take part in, the electoral system, the less I trust it.

Even if the system is reliable, secret, accurate and tamper-proof, it is 
not demographic to insist that citizens delegate their trust in the 
electoral system upwards to those experts who have the capacity to 
understand it.

RC
> It's about the right to privacy. As has been said, a person who is blind cannot vote independently. And people on this list may be happy to delegate to someone else to complete a ballot paper, but there are many people with a vision impairment who are not.
>
> This is a great and hard won victory for those who advocate for equality for people who are blind and vision impaired.
>
> David
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Stewart Fist <stewart_fist at optusnet.com.au>
> To: link at anu.edu.au
> Sent: Tuesday, 14 November, 2006 6:25:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing
>
> Jan wrote
>
>   
>> I am concerned taht Queensland is looking further on - looking at options of
>> on-line voting so people can vote at home.
>>     
>
>
> It seems to me that this is a major the problem. It is an instant solution
> to what a politician perceives as a problem.
>
> In my opinion, voting from home is not desirable, even if it does turn out
> the young people's vote and make it easier for the ill and elderly.  It is
> only acceptable if it is carefully supervised by independent observers (eg.
> in nursing homes).
>
>
> The main advantage Australia gets from compulsory attendance at the voting
> booth (the so-called 'Compulsory Voting' - a non sequitur) is precisely the
> fact that the electoral booth officials can see for themselves that the
> citizen votes in a place without any possibility of coercion from friends,
> family, bosses, thugs, etc.
>
> This is a major factor in making our system the best and safest in the
> world.
>
> When you read about all the various ploys used over the years -- those that
> have been used by political parties, religious leaders, aristocrats,
> military types, oligarchies, business groups, powerbrokers, lobbyists,
> thugs, and racists to make it difficult (or 'unwise') for people to vote in
> various countries -- you have to see the value of Australia's compulsory
> attendance system.
>
> You might believe that is is not needed in the present relatively-benign
> political climate (Tweedledum vs. Tweedledee), but it is a form of insurance
> for democracy that we need to preserve and defend in every possible way.
>
>
>   
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link




Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 




More information about the Link mailing list