I find no problem with the system Roger described. I'd have a rule that in the event of a discrepancy between man/machine readable values that the man readable values rule. Presumably they were vetted by the voter.

BTW, The last election here, San Joaquine County, Ca., we had this huge mark sense ballot. (Fill in the small box, don't go outside the big one.) These were fed directly into a reader/container that rejected ballots having more marks than allowed. Seemed to work just fine.

Quote:
You have a touchscreen (or whatever) PC which the voter makes their choice on. With some UI design skills, and sufficiently large fonts -- even pictures of the candidates -- these should be easy to use and less confusing.

This then prints out a combined machine-/human-readable ticket, so that the user can confirm that their vote is correct. If it's wrong, they do whatever they would have done if they screw up a normal paper ballot (I don't know what happens here). If it's right, they put it in an electronic ballot box.

This is exactly like a normal ballot box: paper goes in, paper doesn't come out, except that it's got an electronic reader in it which reads the machine readable part of the card.