| I was quite surprised that when I voted using this system, the machine actually reported that I had voted for and against an amendment (I had filled in the wrong bubble by mistake and figured I could at least burn my vote on this issue by filling in the other bubble -- perhaps a wrong headed move but really the amendment wasn't that important to me either way). The machine however informed me of this issue and spit out my ballot, at which point the minder asked what was wrong I told him I had intentionally voted this way and he said no problem and proceeded to place my ballot in a spoiled ballot envelope after instructing me to fold it up. Then gave me a new ballot to fill out. I like that the machine was checking for such errors...but I wish it was easier to change my vote after making such a mistake-- electronic voting may have let me undo a vote more quickly. But I do think a paper ballot should be produced by the machine--I would like a physical trace of my vote to persist to allow for recounts. The idea of a purely electronic recount is absurd--what is it going to recount? How could it come up with a different answer from before? With paper at least in principle I could review the document before casting as I did on saturday... --joshua On Nov 7, 2006, at 4:54 PM, J T Johnson wrote: I voted late in morning in Santa Fe. Our paper ballot had candidates on one side, bond issues on the other. We filled in a circle with a ballpoint pen. After filling the ballot, we took it to a guy who instructed us to feed the ballot into a scanner/reader. I did so, and the ballot disappeared. Not knowing that it scanned both sides on one pass, I waited a moment for it to pop back out so I could feed it to capture the other side. |
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
