You specifically don't want that particular brand of audibility for vote tracking, because secrecy is crucially important. Instead, you're going to need some system based on Zero-Knowledge Proofs, or something akin to that.

In most countries internet access is a total monopoly and so unreliable that the service blows out during a championship sports game let alone the entire country using it at once to vote. Meanwhile we have managed to avoid election disputes leading to riots and burning down parliament for 150 years using a simple volunteer run hand counting method with independent observers. I wouldn't be so quick to throw out a century of success for unproven technology from 2008. Maybe if one day we have guaranteed p2p connections avoiding the high priced access control by just 1 or 2 telecom monopolies, and weak standards/protocols that aren't being hacked on a regular basis like LTE.

The problem is that the old successful technology is being thrown out for broken technology anyway. Blockchain voting might be a way to prevent “them” implementing that awful stuff.

>Meanwhile we have managed to avoid election disputes leading to riots and burning down parliament for 150 years using a simple volunteer run hand counting method.

The words 'Accurate, Accountable, Auditable' do not occur in this sentence.

Vote selling also doesn't occur in that sentence. There's a reason we don't tear off a hash from a ballot right now to be given to voters, enabling them to verify later their hand counted ballot wasn't discarded or used to vote for somebody else, because it enables vote selling since now you have proof you voted for a candidate. Foreign superpowers could even automate this with a smart contract. Upload a signed txn proving you voted how they want you to and collect your $100 worth of coins. SuperPACs with hundreds of millions of advertising dollars would cancel ads and buy your vote.

Zero knowledge proofs can solve this.

> Cant you have blockchain based code control even in an open source system to ensure no nefarious business goes on - based on how others have exclaimed they dont trust code for e-voting platforms... why cant this work.

That exists. Git was a blockchain before "blockchain" was a thing to hype.

As somebody who works in the space, you've just hit a topic that annoys me to no end. The term "Blockchain" has a very specific meaning, and that is just a specific type of data structure (that also happens to be used in Git, as you describe). The whole meme around anything that's even remotely like a large scale distributed (not even decentralised, as Bitcoin is!) system being called a "blockchain" is literally worse than useless, because it has no precise meaning, and has robbed a word from a perfectly fine, well-defined meaning.

And you're proving my point...

if "blockchain" is so bad - why do I never hear any actual proposals for anything that is GOOD?

STFU about blockchain and say someting of positive impact as opposed to constantly bitching about blockchain.

I am not pushing blockchain, I am pointing out that people who "work in the space" clearly have nothing, else theyd stop saying "blockchain sucks!" and say "See, what you really want in a situation like this is..."

if this "works" why hasnt it been embraced/shown as example?

Your comment doesnt hold up to the evidence of history...

https://xkcd.com/2030/

AND

https://xkcd.com/463/

Wow, XKCD is now being cited as evidence. What a world we live in.

Hah. Not evidence... anecdotal poking of fun...

Dont take things too seriously. ;-)