That’s illegal in most places. Votes are anonymous specifically because people have been threatened to vote certain ways in the past. If you aren’t given proof of voting a specific way you can’t be forced to vote a specific way.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 day ago
All votes really need a numbered receipt, like a tracking number, that shows what that number voted for, and then posted publicly. This way if you think you’re vote was changed you can go and look online to see if it matches how you voted…but doubt this would ever be put in place.
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 1 day ago
thefactremains@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Also because it’s an effective way to prove you voted a certain way to a vote buyer.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
What’s stopping this now? Vote buying would happen regardless of a system.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 22 hours ago
when votes are anonymous you can just not give a fuck about what they paid you to vote, you can take as many bribes as you want and vote for yourself regardless, thus people don’t really bother buying votes.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
You can pay someone to vote a specific way, but with the current system, there doesn’t exist a way for you to verify that they actually voted how you told them to.
Lemming6969@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
This is the exact use-case for a blockchain, a public immutable ledger where you can validate your vote, but nobody can tie it back to you.
pupbiru@aussie.zone 13 hours ago
the point of anonymous voting is coercion. if you can validate your vote outside of a safe polling place then someone else is able to validate how you voted and force you to vote a particular way
Natanael@infosec.pub 19 hours ago
You’re forgetting about the traffic analysis and key distribution problems
Lemming6969@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
No different than how it’s recorded today. We can improve from there but it’s not worse with the upside of a public ledger.
Natanael@infosec.pub 15 hours ago
You can do much better than a ledger with a commitment scheme and transparency log.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 hours ago
Could this be done such that a person cannot prove that they voted a certain way (the source of the problems people mention, like vote selling becoming viable)?
Lemming6969@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Maybe with a schema that allows a one time verify, and then churns your entry. If that verify occurs upon entry synchronously at the time you vote, if possible, that’d be no less safe than the paper ballot you feed into the machine.
FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 hours ago
No one seems to be understanding that your system doesn’t make who you vote for public…
SupraMario@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Yea… I’m kinda seeing that. It’s not a hard concept lol it’s a paper receipt. Toss it away if you’re worried about it.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I don’t think that’s a good idea at all. Leaks happen all the time and everyone knows that a lot of those machines are compromised. If republicans know exactly who voted for who, that could be an Alligator Auschwitz trip for certain people.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The problem is, that it’s either a system with checks or you get a system with no checks fraud.
This would still be anonymous, you vote, it prints out a ticket number just for you not assigned to anyone but the votes that have been cast. You walk out of the voting booth with a ticket that has a number assigned to the votes nothing more.
garbagebagel@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
I was thinking if it’s just a ballot that has a number but it’s not attached to your name. I.e. if the person handing out the ballots gives you a random one and you’re the only one who knows your own number. I’ve never used electric voting machines but maybe a randomly generated number that you can know but nobody else would know?
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
The problem with any kind of system like this is that if you can verify your own vote, then someone else could always force you to show them that verification.
Relevant XKCD