First%20Workshop%20Themes

== Example Topics for Discussion at the The First Workshop on Voter Verified Elections ==

Please add new ideas or comments on the existing proposed topics. Are these good topics to focus on, or not very interesting? Are there other things that you would rather discuss?

• Distributing trust on multiple parties is good, but how do we choose these parties?
• Is there a place for voter-verifiable elections?
• Is there a difference between permanent secrecy vs. the reality of modern elections?
• What is the role of corporations vs. non-profits vs. research projects?
• What is the role of evoting in developing democracies?
• How does one engage with the public from day zero?

---

''An example comment on this page:'' I'd like to hear other participants' experiences in the cost of kiosk-based technologies on a per machine, per polling place, per voter, and per ballot point-of-view. -Joe Kiniry 17 Sept 2012

---

If the whole idea is to have a discussion, we need

• themes the participants find relevant and are able to discuss, based on their experiences

• a goal/ motivation as to why they should engage in a discussion and expose critical experience, hopes and dreams

Carsten and I talked about the overall goal/motivation could be what the participants want to further explore in a research application. If they are supposed to take part in the research I guess they prefer it to be within their own disciplines/ interdisciplinary settings? Of course they might point to other disciplines they find need to contribute.

In order to have a discussion we need people to reflect on their experiences. I have the feeling that most of the participants have a technical background. Of course the technical is not socially neutral, that is a basic assumption and experience in our work. But even then in what direction do we want people to reflect on experiences. I agree with Joe, it makes sense to ask 3 or 4 participants to present their point of views for the first half hour or so that we have something to discuss. The themes could need a little more specification, but I lack the insight in how most participants think.

Here is a try.
I am concerned that 1 3/4 hour is too long to talk about developing countries if not many have experience with this.

(An alternative would be take Estonia in the morning and Norway in the afternoon and focus on pros and cons and the specific cultural setting in each case. The final hour could be about developing countries)

• Randi 20 Sept 2012

10:00 - 10:15 Coffee Break 10:15 - 12:00 Theme 1:
How are fundamental democratic ideas of secrecy of the vote and citizen control of the election addressed when modernizing elections? Is there a place for voter-verifiable elections? Do we need new institutions to take care of this problem and how to manage it? What part of the election process should be digitalized? Are there alternatives to the current way of classifying/ designing the work? What would a pragmatic approach to security look like? 12:00 - 13:00 Lunch 13:00 - 14:45 Theme 2: What is the role of the public, public administrations, corporations vs. non-profits vs. research projects in modernizing elections? How does one evaluate trials? What methods do we need , who should participate, who should be responsible, who should learn form the trial and with what consequences? ? How do we manage failure and risks? 14:45 - 15:00 Coffee Break 15:00 - 16:45 Theme 3: What is the role of evoting in developing democracies? How does various stakeholders/ participants engage with the public from day zero?