[MG] Secret Ballots
alvaro.maceda at partidodeinternet.es
Fri Jun 4 03:31:48 EDT 2010
Hello, I'm Alvaro Maceda, from "Partido de Internet". I'll present myself in
another message, but now I want to expose a brief comment about this:
So I guess it follows: rather than arguing about it here, we should be
> working together to ensure that personal choices of this kind don't
> end up splitting the voters. If some of them prefer to participate in
> public, while others prefer to remain anonymous, they should
> nevertheless be voting together, side by side. (Otherwise we'd have
> split consensus, much as Thomas foresaw.)
Would that be possible in a voting scheme? I mean, one of the
characteristics of secure voting systems is no-coercion, what implies that
the voter can't prove what he had voted so nobody can force another people
to cast a determinated vote, or to buy votes. I think that's the main
purpose of secret voting: evading coercion (and social coercion).
If somebody can choose between public and private vote, another person can
force him (or pay him) to select public voting and publish the voote proof.
In a system where you can choose between a public and a private vote, is not
absolutely coercible, but it is coercible elsewhere.
So, the chance is: build a complete coercible system (public voting) a
non-coercible system (private voting) or a partial coercible system (mixed
public and private voting).
------------ pr?xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
More information about the Start