Neal McBurnett, Richard T. Carback, David Chaum, Jeremy Clark, John Conway, Aleksander Essex, Paul S. Herrnson, Travis Mayberry, Stefan Popoveniuc, Ronald L. Rivest, Emily Shen, Alan T. Sherman, and Poorvi L. Vora

This note is a response to, and critique of, recent work by Acemyan, Kortum, Bryne, and Wallach regarding the usability of end-to-end verifiable voting systems, and in particular, to their analysis of the usability of the Scantegrity II voting system. Their work is given in a JETS paper [Ace14] and was presented at EVT/WOTE 2014; it was also described in an associated press release [Rut14]. We find that their study lacked an appropriate control voting system with which to compare effectiveness, and thus their conclusions regarding Scantegrity II are unsupported by the evidence they present. Furthermore, their conclusions are contradicted by the successful deployment experiences of Scantegrity II at Takoma Park.