People that were concerned that their votes were altered or not tabulated correctly could log in and verify them. If they find a discrepancy, they could call a hotline and report it. It would also be better than ID or signature verification. Complete, private transparency to provide checks and balances that we can all trust.

1 person did play along. That guy who recorded the snapchat in minnesota of the ballot harvesting scheme.

No body believes him. Why would you risk trying to do that yourself?

Nobody believes the USPS worker in Michigan

https://tenor.com/view/outta-here-gif-17855175

@TomWiliam += One Past Last Jedi, you just advanced to level 1!

this is trump right now 🤣

!rank

is this server a Mason ?

@DrSammyD Hey, Doc... Good Sunday. What do you think about personal vote auditing, though, as a concept? I see the "preventing vote buying" issue as a hurdle, but I am not sure that it is appreciably any different than what we have now.

@TaLoN132 voting system in US is not fear

should only count person vote, and who has more vote win, am I right?

Of course, I'm just trying to address the lack of trust. I'm a software architect/engineer, so I am wondering if there might be a way to use technology to overcome the trust deficit.

I am not talking about technology at all @TaLoN132

what do you call state vote? do you know what I mean?

@TaLoN132 Me too. I quit but that is my background. The problem is with closed software. Back in 2001, there were arguments for open source software but every state rejected that.

If we can all agree that our democracy would benefit from a system that gave the people the peace of mind in knowing that their vote was counted as intended and not flipped, coopted, altered, or nullified, we might be able to work together to make that happen.

Don't forget deluted.

Stick with fully auditable ballots. Use counting machines. Random sample audit the machines and random sample audit the ballots

My 2c

@GregInHouston2 I think you meant “diluted”

I did.

Wish I could blame that one on autocorrect. But I'm trying to eat pizza and type.

what do you call state vote? do you know what I mean?

Vote dilution is easier to identify and would be found with random risk limiting audits.

We call it the state vote.

Only if we look.

ok why there is state vote, that is not fear, it should only person vote

@GregInHouston2 just blame it

am I right

@TomWiliam += One Past Last Jedi, you just advanced to level 2!

If the "winning" side says you're just being cry babies and we don't need to check. And since they are the ones in charge then no check ever happens.

@TomWiliam += One Past Last Jedi Where are you?

I know eyes will roll with this source, but this isn't political: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-some-election-officials-are-trying-to-verify-the-vote-more-easily

ok another question , who said this state has 15 vote and another state has 5 state? depending on what?

I thought it was a clever way to explain risk limiting audits, in case anyone was wondering.

Population.

No I see small state has large vote, and big state has small vote

@GregInHouston2

Land area of a state is of no concern. Only population. Montana is a large state with low population. New Jersey is small state with large population.

what if the population change , is state vote will change @GregInHouston2