From: kaih=9GjyoZ1mw-B@khms.westfalen.de 
  
 MaxFreedom@sws5.ornl.gov (Dave Sill)  wrote on 10.09.04 in : 
  
 > Woodchuck Bill  writes: 
 > 
 > > There are dozens..potentially 100 or more valuable posters on the 
 > > given topic that are denied the ability to vote because they never 
 > > voted on a CFV before, or because they weren't clever enough to 
 > > register months before they even knew about the proposal. 
 > 
 > So allow anyone meeting any of the following criteria to vote: 
 > 
 >   1) Registered via e-mail at least six months ago 
 >   2) Registered via notarized letter 
 >   3) Has voted before 
 >   4) Has posted before 
  
 I've seen similar proposals before, and didn't like them back then, 
 either. 
  
 What I can see - and which would not really be all that relevant to ballot 
 stuffing - would be adding a handshake procedure to voting. That *does* 
 make more work for the UVV, unfortunately - though it ought to be 
 automatable. 
  
 That is, make votes work as follows: 
  
 1, Find a CFV somewhere. 
 2. Send mail to the votetaker address in that document. 
 3. Get back mail from the votetaker with a fresh, unfilled ballot, with 
 some random-looking token inside. 
 4. Fill in, and send back. 
  
 The token would be to make sure every ballot is only used by the person 
 requesting it; the extra steps are to make sure the email address is 
 actually valid at that time. 
  
 The next step would then be to make sure that the addresses actually 
 designate different people; I do not think there is a reasonable way to do 
 that. 
  
 Kai 
 -- 
 http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/ 
 "... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it." 
   - Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)