Comments

1
Ok, these folks are idiots, but is the concept of voting online really a bad one?

If implemented properly, online voting will probably be more expensive to implement and maintain than the current methods we use, but I don't see it being inherently more prone to corruption.
2
Dougsf @1,

OK, let's put it this way. Would you feel confident in the election of President Palin, if it all came down to very close races in Ohio and Florida, conducted via online balloting?
3
If we let the non-retirees vote, then they might realize they're the majority and are being taken to the cleaners.

Can't let everyone vote - that would be Democracy ...
4
Okay. Having just gone and checked out the site, the Conservation District online voting is super lame.

First verify you are a voter. Then print a sign a form which you must then fax, mail or scan and email. Wait 48 hours and get a pin number which you may use to vote.

BLURG! Going to Renton (their only in person voting site) is easier than this...
5
@1: Yes, online voting has all sorts of fundamental problems that polling-place voting does not.

One big one is that it cannot enforce ballot secrecy. I might want to sell my vote, but since I go into the voting booth alone, there is no way someone who wants to buy my vote can verify that I have voted as promised. Hence there is no market for vote-buying. This is not the case if I can vote at home at my computer. (This is also a problem with mail-in ballots.)

Another problem is identify verification. E-commerce businesses pay hundreds of dollars a year for certs and even under that system the actual identify link is not very secure. We would need to give government-issed certs to every voter, and people would need to be trained in secure cert management. And of course a government-cert system would raise many (both justified and unjustified) privacy concerns.

Another problem is scaling. With some effort, I can forge an ID and take the time to impersonate that voter at a polling place. But even with a large group of co-conspirators I can get maybe a few hundred votes out of that. But if I find find a flaw in an e-voting system, one person with one computer can write a script that immediately scales up to forge tens of thousands of votes.

Regarding KCCD, why not just make its officers appointed by the King County council and be done with it? That would immediately make it representative of King County voters as a whole.
6
@2 - Considering that I'm confident to both pay my taxes and manage my life's saving online, compounded with the knowledge I live in one of the country's most liberal enclaves where bags of uncounted ballots (for the progressive mayoral candidate) are found floating in the bay, I'd call it a wash.

It's all about implementation. The technology doesn't scare me. I'm as likely to be mugged as hacked.
7
@5 - I'm willing to admit, I hadn't given thought to the idea of the masses selling their votes. Like I said, I think it'd be possible to implement this properly, but it might also necessitate an insane audits bureaucracy—I'm not pushing for it, it wouldn't be cheaper than making voters show up in person. But I do think it's possible to achieve online voting without the risk of corruption that would exceed what we've currently got.
8
@5 Currently we have a minuscule number of highly partisan voters contending with little interaction or notice by the people at large. Allowing the Conservation District and it's budget to be decided by the more l33t side, may be an improvement.

Hell, it's not like any of the candidates are reaching out to potential voters or even listing endorsements recognizable to the less informed voter or not.

Honestly, the KCD should do it's membership selection by initiative. It's not like Eyman or Perpetually Offensive is paying a per-voter fee.

Most stupidest, indeed, and apparently planning on staying that way.
9
Goldy -

1 - You are as confused as many seem to be. It's the King Conservation District, not King County Conservation District. It has no tie to King County, other than the fact that it exists in the same geographic area.
2 - KCD (not KCCD, as you refer to it), has never used King County Elections. It was King County Elections that had problems, namely in 2004. They've always run their own elections, which is why they were so low-key and only in a few locations around the county.
3 - Online voting has happened elsewhere. KCD is not the first. In 2010, the State of West Virginia ran a pilot program for members of the military to vote on-line. I believe there were others.
10
Give me Purple Ink-Stained Conservation Vote Fingers or Give Me Death!
11
@10 I'd certainly vote "yes" on that.

@9 I find their FAQ interesting (kingcd.org/new_ele_faq.htm)
Their answer is that WAC 135-110-200 / RCW 89.08 specifies a first quarter election and other details for minimum voting requirements.

Oddly, and I think we should make sure to up the frequency until the point of inclusion here, there is no follow-up "WTF? Why don't we just change the 1st quarter requirement?" question and answer.
12
@11 - the operating rules for conservation districts are odd, at best. Makes you wonder who came up with this.

For myself, I'm interested to see how this turns out. I'm skeptical of on-line voting, but know we can't iron out bugs until it's practiced. I see a conservation district election as one of the least damaging ways to try out a new form of voting.
13
This is the worst idea in the history of voting. Nobody tell 4chan or its all over.
14
Ok I'll vote.

So who is a good candidate to vote for? Why doesn't the "Stranger" interview the candidates?
15
Just voted on-line. It went smoothly after I used Internet Explorer, instead of Safari, to download the form.

The procedure is a little cumbersome, but I can see how the purpose of this is to make it more difficult for hackers to game the system or for wealthy special interests to buy votes.

Also, voting on-line can be made even more secure by providing for a public audit of the vote. For example, the State could be given the authority to select a small random sample of voters and to contact them directly to verify their votes.
16
see also: "King Conservation District's online election drew fewer voters," by Keith Ervin, Seattle Times, March 20, 2011, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo…

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.