Identity
Filter
Visitors
(1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
Highest posts
Latest posts
Links
Highest posts
Latest posts
It’s a simple idea, it’s a grand idea, it’s one we don’t even consider because of an old consensus: it can’t be done! This is comprehensible, internet is full of holes which most certainly couldn’t stand the scrutiny of ferocious ambitions. Right?
And yet, voting through internet would bring into life the one true form of democracy: Direct Democracy.
Well, I think it can be done, rather easily if you consider the features involved: transparency to observe everything that happens, pgp signatures to sign and verify votes, electoral lists against which are calculated polls’ results.
The transparency should be total: no anonymity, you and I can see and observe everything. We can recalculate results and check votes, we can go to a person and verify her votes’ accuracy.
In fact everybody should be able to setup a mirror server at anytime. Which could be part of a larger cluster, and used just like the original node.
The votes going through this installation need to be tamper proof, what better way than to use an old and tested technology: pgp signatures. One sign his votes with his private key, everybody can check the origin of these signatures using the corresponding public key.
And now, how can we make sure that to one man correspond one and only one vote? It’s the internet, where everybody can be anything… so in fact we can’t. Instead we can add one bit of information to any poll’s result: the electoral list used to calculate the results. Thus anybody can manage his own lists with his own inscription processes. And if you don’t trust the manager, then feel free to create your own list and advertise it to the voters.
Wouldn’t you trust such a system? Simple, straight forward. It could even be implemented after a peer to peer fashion. Of course, as such, it lacks one important characteristic: privacy.
It can be regained through a third party trustee, vouching for your re-inscription under a pseudonym. The list of individuals demanding privacy and using this trustee must of course be strictly equal in number to the list of pseudonyms created using this same trustee. And just like anybody can setup a mirror server or an electoral list, anybody can be a trustee.
In fact all those elements can be implemented in a physical poll station where one can also observe what happens. There can be mirror servers, inscription onto an electoral list, generation of pseudonyms, signing and casting the vote.
What more would you need?
Of course it doesn’t resolve the one thing that may have been nagging at your thoughts since you started reading: is Direct Democracy the one true form of democracy? Yes! Of course it is!!! :-D
+1
New discussion
Answer
Hi and glad to see another programmer willing to help us :>)
Anonymity is difficult. Some may fear trouble from employers, friends, family etc. so they may vote differently to appease these folks. This could cause very inaccurate elections.
Of course the “secret” election does not allow easy checking and it to is full of fraud.
Just a bit to think on.
Bruce Eggum WI USA
+1
New discussion
Answer
Hello hello Bruce, cool to see you here! ;)
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 05:12:20PM +0100, anon wrote:
Hi and glad to see another programmer willing to help us :>)Definitely. But as you can see, I do have some code and some concepts already implemented, which is always a difficult point when integrating a community.
Yet, I’m also quite open minded, as parlement should/could show itself. For example, it’s a forum and a mailing list. And eventually, it could also become a chat room and a news group. Or whatever else is available. Even a kind of wiki, a democratic one :)
Anonymity is difficult. Some may fear trouble from employers, friends, familyetc. so they may vote differently to appease these folks. This could cause veryinaccurate elections.Of course the “secret” election does not allow easy checking and it to is fullof fraud.
I agree. Full transparency is a strength, which can actually increase the confidence we can have in elections. But that much information can also be too much on some individuals.
It’s the very consequence of internet, here information and its copying is very cheap. To introduce anonymity, we actually need to remove some information: the link between a person and its votes.
The easiest path I can envision, is to leave that bit of information in the hands of a trusted third party. One each voter can choose individually.
It’s not perfect, but it’s already a start…
+1
New discussion
Answer
Yes and a start is what we need. The third party idea does cover identity. Perhaps a site would accommodate this.
The real deal is to get Initiative and Binding Referendum into our local and national governments.
Perhaps this system you offer could begin the needed petition(s)?
Tks, Bruce
+1
New discussion
Answer
As I consider this better way you have instituted, I like it more and more and it makes me very happy.
For instance, I have certain views on health, education, equality etc. I could perhaps find a person who had similar views in health, and was a “professional” in “natural” health. Than I could have them vote for me. I lean to generic and natural medicine.
If their votes displeased me they get replaced or I vote myself.
Also, there are issues I do not understand in depth. I could find a person with that knowledge I trust to do those issues.
This is exciting! I have tried to follow issues here in the USA and there are to many, and many I don’t particularly know about.
Yup you got a real deal here.
Thanks for all you are doing.
Bruce
+2
New discussion
Answer
+2
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 04:24:11AM +0100, eggy wrote:
Oh, you might be interested in this. There are many of the direct democracypolitical people here: http://www.wmgd.net/index.html Go to articles and ck itout. World Government World Parliament World—thats us folks BruceI’ll definitely check it out!
+1
+1
New discussion
Answer
Hi echarp (sharp you are)(compliment)
I set the RSS and it goes to http://echarp.org/Re_echarps_blog
I thought it would go to blog, but has window of choice, none to the blog. I can get to parliament.
Be nice if RSS went here http://echarp.org/blog
another RSS to parliament proper?
I can not figure out how to email you direct?
I don’t know language and not tell today did I learn you are French? Co you live in France?
Perhaps a place for brief profile?
E Programs changing so fast hard to keep up.
Good that is happening!
EU Constitution very important!
NEED to divide powers, each country sovereign, EU only has limited power which is jointly accepted by each country.
Now, the whole EU ruled by a commerce committee - but better than being ruled by a shrub or a bush.
Well, that is another subject --long
Bruce
+2
New discussion
Answer
-1
(I found out that I didn’t answer that)
Be nice if RSS went here http://echarp.org/blog another RSS to parliamentproper?
There are RSS links on the right hand side, which should go to http://echarp.org/blog/index.rss and http://echarp.org/blog/vote.rss
I see you have filled your email, now that means you can also receive all posts by mail.
+1
New discussion
Answer
+1 Thank you very very much!!!
But there are difficulties. Delegations will be a real difficulty to code. Maybe because the feature, as it is imagined, is too ambitious.
+1
New discussion
Answer
-1
-1
The transparency should be total: no anonymity, you and I can see and observe everything. We can recalculate results and check votes, we can go to a person and verify her votes’ accuracy.
Will the votes remain secret, under such conditions ?
Further more, this way of voting will not prevent electors to give or sell their votes. They will just give their key to let some body else vote in their name…
+1
New discussion
Answer
-1
+1
-1
-1