Diebold

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 44
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    Resurrecting an ancient, but most current thread here. This is going mainstream and the topic is thankfully out of the realm of "conspiracy-theory-accusability". It look as if California, the largest voting bloc may de-certify e-voting machines manufactured by Diebold Inc.. the largest e-voting equipment manufacturer. This is extremely good news for anyone who values a fair and democratic electoral process.



    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...g_challenged_3



    Incidentally, the majority of E-voting terminals use Microsoft WINDOWS operating system. Shouldn't that get us a bit suspicious, on a Macintosh users board??
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 44
    kirklandkirkland Posts: 594member
    Deibold is corrupt and untrustworthy, no doubt about it.



    But I do support electronic voting, so long as a physical copy of the ballot is created and store for verification.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 44
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kirkland

    Deibold is corrupt and untrustworthy, no doubt about it.



    But I do support electronic voting, so long as a physical copy of the ballot is created and store for verification.




    How can you verify that the printed copy is identical to what is registered on the vote count?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 44
    kirklandkirkland Posts: 594member
    You let the voter review it before leaving the booth. They hit "vote" and a piece of paper rolls into view, separated by a pane of glass so they don't try to take it, and they have to hit a "confirm printed ballot" button and then that printed ballot falls into a bin below the machine.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.