Voting process for PEP 308 (was: PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms)

[John La Rooy]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 00:14:41 -0800
Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> wrote:


> 
> Furthermore, there's a simpler issue here:  I would hope that an
> votetaker would abstain (or at least offer to) from any vote he/she was
> counting, simply out of basic ethics.
> 

That is hardly democratic! Why not have votetakers from both/all sides
so they can "scrutinise" each other. I think most people involved in the
debate will know how to use "cc" in their email. The ethical problem can
be avoided by having the votetakers vote before they see any results.

One mechanism would be

1. Everyone encrypts their vote and submits the ciphertext
2. The ciphertexts are published - via usenet or email
3. Everyone submits a key to verify their vote
4. The keys are also published
5. Everything is out in the open and anyone can count/check the result

Is an open ballot ok though?


John