Retro-Vva

 

A Novel Citizen Conducted Post-Election Audit

Results Considered Irrefutable

 

By: M. J. Sperry

11/03/14

 

The one and only thing a citizen has to control government is “the vote”. If a citizen truly believes their government is unresponsive to them as well as the vast majority of other citizens, there can be only one explanation. There is something intrinsically wrong with the one and only mechanism of democratic control that exists, “the vote”.

 

Vote Fraud's Most Important Element

Media rarely covers the issue of vote fraud. When covered, people are most often distracted by its focus on the fraudulent act itself, something that is of relatively minor significance.

 

The far more important issue is the final vote count. Is it an accurate representation of the actual vote? Why is that important?

 

An accurate, independently “verified” vote count is something that must be considered an absolute , if one intends to take a contested election to either a court of law, or the court of public opinion. Especially, if one intends to “win”.

 

While an independent check of a vote count may sound like a tall order to some, consider that we often do that very thing and rarely, if ever think about it.

 

In schools, classes of children do it when they vote on class officers. At club meetings, members vote issues up or down routinely. We do it when the family "votes" on which TV program to watch.

 

While these examples may seem trite, even childish to some, the “results” are in fact far superior to virtually all national vote systems in use today. What makes these examples unique? It is that there is never a question of “vote fraud”.

 

Think about it! The results are always considered irrefutable, beyond dispute! Why? What makes them so uniquely reliable?

 

It is the fact, that each voter operates as not just a voter, but their own vote counter as well. Further, they are effectively serving as a "witness" and verifier of their own vote, plus they are also witnessing the vote of all other individuals in the voting pool. As if that wasn't enough, they do all of this at precisely the same moment in time.

 

They are their own voter. They are the verifier of their own vote. They are the witness and verifier of all other votes. They “tally” the votes of the entire vote pool. And they do it all in an instant, before any form of fraudulent “hack” could possibly be inserted at any vulnerable point.

 

That last thing is important, as it takes an interval of time to enter a vote system (when no one is looking), no matter how small that interval might be. It takes time to insert a “hack” between the point in time where the vote is cast and the point where that vote and all others are counted.

 

That's really quite a feat, for people who are only trying to determine which program to watch on TV? Though simple, the system just described is a type of vote system in which there simply is, no "entry point" for vote fraud.

 

There is no ballot box stuffing, because there is no ballot box. There is no rigged electronic machines because well, there are no machines. There are no “chain of custody” issues, because there are no custodians.

 

There are no “dead” voters voting from the grave, because all the voters are “known” to all others and further, they can be seen to be quite alive. Plus there are no vote counters playing "switcheroo" with ballots because, there are no ballots and the only vote counters actually present are the voters themselves serving as, their own vote counters.

 

All of this begs the question: “Would it be possible to design a new system.” One by which elections could be retroactively audited using this simple, yet quite functional system as a “model”?

 

“If Ya' Want It Done Right - Do It Yourself” (the old folks)

In 2007 the author published a somewhat controversial ebook entitled: Desiderata Of The Citizen Vote. (No longer available) The book was a compilation of several new concepts the author was having a very difficult time disseminating.

 

One such was called “Vva”, an acronym for - Voter verified audit. It was designed as a highly secure vote audit system for U.S. Elections. If you're interested, there is a trilogy of articles that provides the theory, history and details of Vva here

 

The book exposed the discovery/proof that wide-scale election fraud began in the U.S. with the introduction of the “Secret Ballot” just after the American Civil War. It was a secrecy that was “proven” to have ended the ability to verify the results of the vote. Verification was something that had existed for the previous 100 years, a time when the vote was conducted in the “open”, without secrecy.

 

The book also introduced “VizVote”, a vote system that is conducted visually. Its main advantage being that it eliminated some entry points for fraud that exist in present vote systems.

 

It was a natural progression of these two concepts, that they be “rolled” into another synergistically superior vote system, such as the one being presented here. A system called: “Retro-Vva”.

 

The Retro-Vva

Consider that the one person who could be most relied upon to ensure the integrity of a citizens vote, is the citizen them self. This makes the voter them self, a highly reliable “witness” of the circumstances of their own vote.

 

The Retro-Vva (R-Vva) retrospectively “polls” the voter as to how they voted, “after” a contested election is completed. It does this visually, in a manner where the voter serves as their own verifier, of their own vote. It is essentially “ad-hoc” and completely independent of government.

 

NOTE: Government checking its own “secret” election, an election that decides whether that very government retains or relinquishes its power, constitutes a clear conflict of interest.

 

If later the voter is asked to reveal their vote “anonymously” as part of a process to ensure the integrity of their own vote, why would any citizen answer anything other than the absolute truth? To lie would destroy the enormous empowerment a “genuine” vote confers upon the voter.

 

In the R-Vva that power is secured by the voter, as they act as a “visual verifier” of not just their own vote, but the entire pool of votes as well. The number of such verifications, as you are about to see, could become quite large.

 

All of this and more is what makes the R-Vva “robust”. So robust, that it must be considered the ultimate form of security and certainly far more secure than any “unverified” vote count it may be testing.

 

Thus, in a court of law or the court of public opinion, any vote count that does not meet the meticulous verification of “every single vote” as does an R-Vva, must logically be regarded as highly inferior.

 

How It Works

An R-Vva can be divided into four distinct actions: Organization, Verification, Compilation of the entire vote and the Dissemination of results.

 

While that may seem like a lot, don't be intimidated. Once organized, the entire vote from verification through dissemination of results could take less than three hours. How?

 

Imagine an athletic stadium. On each side are 500 groups, each numbering some 30 voter/verifiers, or 15,000 on each side. Each verifier is given a two page, business type, carbon-copy form appropriately printed and numbered for the occasion.

 

Each verifier privately and anonymously enters what they previously voted in the election being tested. They then tear off and retain the top “original” page, then fold the remaining “copy” and drop it into a collection box.

 

A child then draws each ballot which is pinned to a “view” board for all to see. Each verifier then verifies that the vote they marked, on the uniquely numbered “original” also appears, on the uniquely numbered “copy”.

 

If no one raises an issue, the votes are then tallied. That tally is legibly written on a small white board of 1.0 by .5 meters.

 

One of each group is then chosen by a draw of numbers. That person then carries the white board, that now contains the entire vote results of their group, to the stands on the opposite side of the field.

 

There they take up position in a predetermined seat. At the appropriate time they raise their board in a manner for all across the field to view and photograph.

 

Those “individuals” on the other side literally create thousands of photographic “records” of the entire vote tally using their digital phones, tablets or cameras.

 

Twenty rows of twenty-five seats, each with a white board equals 500 boards. If each board contained the votes of thirty verifiers, the total would be some 15,000 verifications. Those on the opposite side of the stadium then do the same thing, increasing the total to 30,000.

 

In less than two hours, as many as 30,000 votes have been “individually” verified, counted and photographed. The “entire” vote has also been individually verified, counted and photographed. Plus, individuals in the stands have literally created thousands of photographic “records” of the entire vote and the entire process.

 

And of utmost importance, the entire vote composed of each and every single vote, has been verified and counted by the one most trustworthy vote verifier of all, the actual voter who cast it.

 

At this point the R-Vva is completed. Congratulations! You are now a people in genuine control of your country. Use it wisely.
 

See the "Protocol" for conducting a Retro-Vva here
 

...

Note:

1) This essay may contain entirely new concepts regarding "vote verification" that may constitute intellectual property of a patentable nature. The author hereby reserves all rights and;

2) All intellectual property/patent rights that may be upheld or otherwise accrue to the author (owner) are hereby relinquished to the Public Domain.

© M. J. Sperry - November 3, 2014
All rights to this work are released to the Public Domain, but only if reprinted in its entirety including disclaimers. Please distribute widely.

 


The dollar best spent in today’s times is on those researchers, thinkers and writers
   who so often work in solitude and even poverty trying to light the candles that
    show us the way. Support them and those courageous websites that often face
        reproach and even retaliation by publishing their work.