Re: PDF of Slides

[Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Joe Pezzillo wrote:

> Attached please find the latest near-final draft of the slides to be 
> shown tomorrow, for those of you who can't make it to the Trident 
> tonight.
> 
> I only have limited time to make changes, please send me your comments 
> ASAP.

Joe, and the rest of the list that's up this evening,

The slides look great - thanks for all your hard work on the presentation.  
I do have one suggestion for a change.  I'd love to get feedback on it
from anyone reading the list this evening:

What do you think about specifically mentioning "voter-verifiable" paper
ballots?  

I know that at least one person has mentioned a concern that adding
"voter-verifiable"  makes our goal a little more complicated to
understand.  But it seems to me that it is worth it.  If the paper ballot
is not voter-verifiable, how does the voter know that their vote was
recorded the way they wanted?  The voter has to trust that the barcode, or
whatever image, represents the vote that they cast.

If there are software bugs or security problems with the voting machine, 
these problems could cause the barcode to not represent the voter's 
intent.  The voter would have no way to verify this prior to depositing 
their ballot.

So I suppose the question that I have for whoever's out there tonight is:
Do others feel that it is important to mention 'voter-verifiable' here?  
Or do people feel that it is too confusing to mention, or perhaps 
unnecessary in light of the text about 'vote marking devices?'


> THANK YOU!

Thank you, Joe -


- Paul