[thecrow1213]

Interesting. I'm no subject expert so I can't critique this, but it sounds better than other online voting systems I've heard. I like the checks and balances in place too.

Now I only skimmed this article, but I feel like most people who argue against online voting use arguments about how insecure it is that already apply to what's happening right now (voting software is a black box, can be hacked, etc etc, this also describes current voting machines). The only difference is there isn't a single voting db or site somewhere for people to manipulate a large number of votes (which like you said is protected as long as people can verify the open software / data).

Yes paper does have indelible properties but paper doesn't scale well, and having a paper counting machine introduces the same black box that people use as argument against current voting machines. Yes security is an issue, but scalability is also an issue.

[blibble]

not scaling well is a security feature!

it's a lot harder to steal and alter 5000 ballot papers than 5, which is not the case with electronic systems.

[thecrow1213]

True, but not scaling well has its drawbacks in voter participation and data management, no?

Like the post above me said, isn't the risk of peoples votes getting switched OK as long as people can verify their vote value?