jack: (Default)
[personal profile] jack
Fanf links to a post I'd forgotten, http://fanf.livejournal.com/120445.html

He suggests a useful compromise would be a machine which manually collates ballots into stacks. I think weight is a red herring -- it could presumably produce stacks of a 100 for each candidate, or similar, and a cursory check could then ensure that a random sample of stacks have exactly the right number.

This would have most of the benefits of the current system, but reduce the manual effort?

I've never seen votes being counted, is that about right?
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org