[ghostly_s]

How are paper ballots at all an obstacle here? RCV is just a different format for the ballot. You can still input the votes and calculate the runoffs digitally to save time, you just have the benefit of verifiable paper records for the raw data.

[Mbioguy]

Paper ballots are not the obstacle. (I like paper ballots with optical scanning, as in my main post.) The obstacle is that there are some who want there to be no machine involvement in tabulation of results.

Media is hyping the fear of 'election hacking' to the point where people I know personally want everything to be done manually, no machine or computer involvement at all.

[nonbel]

>"Media is hyping the fear of 'election hacking' to the point where people I know personally want everything to be done manually, no machine or computer involvement at all."

Whats wrong with this?

[bluGill]

It takes time - we wouldn't know who was elected president until several days after the election was over.

I tried to write that in a neutral tone. However you might find it as amusing as me to read it (with required word changes) in different dialects. I think the stereotypical "valley girl" best captures how I feel about it.

[nonbel]

That doesn't seem like much of an issue to me when the alternative is nobody trusts the results.

[bluGill]

To you. But it is a big deal some someone else. Your task is to figure out who, and why. (why tends to be obvious once you realize who)

[nonbel]

Why are you speaking in riddles?