Talk:Voting machine

Propaganda

I consider this article blatant pure one-sided propaganda. All issues about electronic voting and links to manipulation, hacking, vote fraud, Diebold, court ruling etc. are non-existant. This article is a shame for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:8CC0:57C0:3066:F094:1091:783C (talk) 10:42, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

It sounds like you want to write a political polemic, not an encylopedia article. Wikipedia is not a platform for political opinions. More importantly, Wikipedia is just not about the narrow and trivial concerns of the USA, it should have a global perspective.Gymnophoria (talk) 14:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Recent rewrite

Great edit/rewrite of Voting machine, 68.50.103.212. Your knowledge of the subject is commendable. Let's just hope that this time user Joebeone shows more respect for this contribution of yours than he/she has shown for those of others in the past, acting as if he/she were the owner of the article. I have an objection. though: your edit deviates somewhat from the main subject, voting machines per se, and pays more attention to Voting systems, which is the subject of another article. AVM 12:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

It really is an superb rewrite; good work 68.50.103.212. (I know I don't own the article... I'd just like to keep it neutral, etc. I'll try to do a better job.) I also think, like AVM, that it is more a description of "voting systems", we might want to add a disambiguation notice to the Voting system page. -- Joebeone (Talk) 01:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

To be neutral it has to acknowledge the many non-controversial observations about voting machines:

Issues inherently arising from using voting machines at all =

The article seems to be deliberately censored to remove the inherent issues about voting machines.

There's a treasure trove of information about election integrity at http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Voting_Rights. -- zappini (10/05/06)

Voting machine scarcity as a factor in voter frustration was earmarked as the most critical voter turnout and participation question of the] U.S. presidential election, 2008. The number of machines may determine how many get to vote at all. Note this quote from LA Times, Nov 2 2008:

This has the potential to disenfranchise a heck of a lot more people than, dare I say it, hacked electronic voting machines," said Tova Wang, vice president for research at Common Cause, which has been monitoring potential balloting problems ahead of this week's vote.

During the 2004 presidential election, long lines at polling places in Cleveland, Columbus and other Ohio locations caused as many as 129,000 voters to get tired of waiting and not vote, according to one survey commissioned by Democrats after the election.

I did also react to this, I live in Sweden and here the idea to implement anything other than a completely manual voting system has constantly been turned down even thou the subject has been up for discussions endless of times the last century. SweBrainz (talk) 12:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Corrections

• I think the inclusion of the "Simple paper ballot" while not "technology" as you put it is of paramount importance to this article.
• "Voting machines are used to replace traditional paper ballots." Is an incorrect statement. Though that can be the case, there are many situations where paper ballots were never used prior to the use of voting machines.
• The voting systems were listed chronologically
• Re-added "Marksense" though, I agree "optical Scan" has become the more popularized term
• Updated definition of "With electronic input device" and reworded VVPAT

--Electiontechnology 18:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Voting Machine (Baldwin County, Alabama)

I live in Baldwin County, Alabama. This is one of the most conservative areas in our state. Republicans have a big advantage in our County. We vote for the most conservative (Republican) candidate on a consistent basis. The reported error, picked up by the media, favoring Gov Siegelman, during the election was not the certified election results, as later provided by Judge Adrian Johns. The certified results was given only after the feeder information was double checked. The error, which caused the rollup error came from Magnolia Springs. I think it was caught because more votes were reported that they had voters.

I have known Adrian Johns for about 30+ years. His integrity can be trusted at all times. It appears that computers or computer programs caused the error. I do not know the poll workers in Magnolia Springs. But, it does not appear that anyone tried to deny Gov Siegelman any votes. Mrs. Baxley seemed to be well liked in our area by both Republicans and Democrats. But, any crossover votes between Political Parties would have been detected.

JAMES J. KIRKSEY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.153.59.138 (talk) 03:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

ISG TopVoter

Anyone know anything about this voting system or have any references that could help? There's TopVoter.com, which I believe is Slovenian. (not an easy one to find a translator for) Any help is appreciated. --Electiontechnology (talk) 04:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

ISG Topvoter is an electronic device designed specifically to assist disabled voters. It has been used in Slovenia since the local elections in 2006. Voter can receive information (e.g., who the candidates are) through various ways, e.g. via screen or via headphones. It can communicate to the machine using touch-screen, numeric keyboard, joystick, etc. The machine is capable of producing paper ballot. Does this help? Topjur01 (talk) 07:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Legal situation

How about adding a paragraph about the legal situation of voting machines in different countries? There is quite a range around the world. Brazil was the first country to have fully electronic elections, and Germany's high court "Bundesverfassungsgericht" forbid the use of voting machines completely at 2009-03-03. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.96.104.132 (talk) 13:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Programmer under oath admits computers rig elections

• Programmer under oath admits computers rig elections — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.147.102.235 (talk) 23:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Iranians-new-machin-for-elections.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Iranians-new-machin-for-elections.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Iranians-new-machin-for-elections.JPG) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

strange wording

"Voting machines are the total combination of mechanical, electromechanical, or electronic equipment (including software, firmware, and documentation required to program control, and support equipment)"

Does the documentation really count as part of the voting machine? I think that's not what 99% of people would consider part of the voting machine itself. It's just a thing related to voting machines. Maybe this could be reworded?

05:26, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Straight Party Lever

I thought I heard that the straight party lever (and its functional equivalents in other types of voting machines) has been outlawed in the US, but I can't reme,ber where I heard that. Bostoner (talk) 01:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Straight party voting is allowed in some states of the US and not in others. There is no federal legislation on the issue. Straight party voting significantly reduces the time voters spend in the voting booth, reducing the number of booths required per polling place and therefore the cost of elections, but it may encourage thoughtless voting. Douglas W. Jones (talk) 15:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Typically British

In Early History it says "Spratt's machine was typically British"? What the hell does that mean?Gymnophoria (talk) 14:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I have reworded the sentence to refer to a typical British election. Better? Douglas W. Jones (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

This article is an education, and not in a good way. The British electoral system has its faults (don't get me started on those!); but the only technology used by voters consists of a ballotpaper and a pencil attached to a piece of string! Nuttyskin (talk) 20:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Where are voting machines used?

Seems like relevant information for the article. Which countries have these things? --superioridad ^(discusión) 05:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Citations

The article has had many citations on historical machines, and few on current machines. I'm reorganizing to build on the historical sections and add cites on present machines, some of which were already in Vote counting. I think most readers coming to this article will be interested in history or current usage, so I'm focusing on those sections. For clarity, sometimes I changed tabulate, which primarily means to display results in a table, to tally, which means to count the results for each candidate. Numbersinstitute (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2020 (UTC)