Adding 2/8
next/prev race keys is pretty trivial. It does potentially mean a longer
list of instructions every candidate though: 5 keys to explain instead
of 3. This is why the idea was rejected in the initial design. Is
everyone comfortable with increasing the instruction list? I am not
entirely. Perhaps this is a reasonable thing to make an
option.
Ken, IF the 0 key is used to repeat
instructions at any time, I'm confused how the instruction list would be
longer for "every candidate"? Again, having run it only briefly I think
this is a matter of creating an appropriate "scripts". Reading the
instructions at the beginning of every name may be too much. I'd like to
see us get some real world input at this point. We've (Deborah actually)
got a good relationship with an ADA group in Berkeley if its the right
time for this type of input. What do you think?
Presently, for example, a candidates
name is read 4 times by the time that candidate is actually selected.
Perhaps some streamlining can be done here. Perhaps a 5 key instruction
accessible with the 0 key during voting is better than instructions with each
candidate. Again, real world input would be helpful here. Actually
it would also be helpful to see the ADA folks debate the point among
themselves so they can see that even within their own group they have
differing opinions.
If we do add 8/2, then the
current behavior of 4 when at the top of a race is redundant with the previous
race key. If there is a previous race key, then previous candidate
should advance to the last candidate of the previous race, not the
first.
Agreed. But, I think you need
more input than just what I've given here. Also, I think of the 8 or on
my keyboard the up-arrow as moving forward in races.
As a final
note, keep in mind that voting is largely a linear process.
The only reason a voter would want to be skipping ahead though races is
if they go (way) back to a previous race and then want to move
forward.
I would
respectfully disagree with this analysis. I think many people want to
NOT vote a race or series of races, such as a series of Judge races that they
don't know about or care about, where they would skip forward for 5 or 6
races. This is not at all unusual. Even just skipping one race is
very common.
Right now moving
forward through voted races is a bit tedious because even the candidates that
cannot be voted nor canceled are played. An option to skip those
candidates automatically is in the works, and may render this whole discussion
moot.
For the
most part it would render it useless, except for ballots that involve alot of
races that folks don't care about, again, particularly judges, local measures,
etc.
Ken
Deborah pointed out that the 4 key already
functions as I was suggesting the 2 key should do. So my suggestion is
simply to allow the voter to use the 8-uparrow key as a way to skip to the
next race.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: BallotStationCE-4-1-0-2 audio ballot race
advancement
Agreed. In only a very cursory look,
if you voted for the 3rd of 6 candidates, we need to be able to move to the
next race. We need to be able to skip race altogether if voter wants (
I knows this will vary between states, based on state laws). Some states will require you to hear all
candidates, other will not.
In the latter case, you've got to be able to
move to next race somehow (wouldn't an 8 -uparrow or 2-downarrow key
function in the same way the 4 and 6 key do now, and while adding keys, at
least it works in the same fashion as the movement within a
race?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001
2:32 PM
Subject: BallotStationCE-4-1-0-2
audio ballot race advancement
The audio
ballot should give the voter the opportunity to immediately advance to the
next race, without having to advance to the last candidate in a race
first. Currently, it is only possible to advance to the next race
after having advanced to the last candidate in a race in the audio
ballot.
Nel