Direct Vote: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
#Voters authenticated by an email address issued by an institutional issuer such as an university, school, company or a governmental organisation ie. where it is publicly known that the postmaster checks the identities of people before issuing an email address | #Voters authenticated by an email address issued by an institutional issuer such as an university, school, company or a governmental organisation ie. where it is publicly known that the postmaster checks the identities of people before issuing an email address | ||
#The rest ie. anonymous email services | #The rest ie. anonymous email services | ||
Whether the direct votes are anonymized or visible or whether decision on this is left up to the voter on each issue is yet unclear. | |||
Revision as of 12:42, 5 October 2003
This is perhaps a little unfair since people who don't have access to computer systems are likely unable to use their direct vote. Burden of proof on authentication is yet to be solved. A partial solution could be to divide the direct votes into three distinct groups and let the consumers decide on the amount of trust they place on each group of voters:
- Voters authenticated with cryptographic methods, where the identity of the keyholder is known by an commercial or non-commercial certification authority.
- Voters authenticated by an email address issued by an institutional issuer such as an university, school, company or a governmental organisation ie. where it is publicly known that the postmaster checks the identities of people before issuing an email address
- The rest ie. anonymous email services
Whether the direct votes are anonymized or visible or whether decision on this is left up to the voter on each issue is yet unclear.