I think that comments on news arriving from Israel must be accompanied by certain puns, so do not blame me.

A Russian woman living on the Promised Land was able to vote three times, and with her minor daughter - four times.

I wonder what guides the person who goes to the polls for amendments and votes several times. Is this fun in people like that - like an attraction? I remember that in any previous elections, the so-called carousels were always reproached, but now since the opposition is doing this, it turns out that everything is fine. Probably because in their interests.

That's how I see it - I went to the station, saw a mistake, reported what was called, did not try to trick the system, but absolutely sincerely said: “Dudes, you have a problem here, we need to work.” Well, because it will be honest. If you are a liberal and demand honest elections and an honest system from people loyal to the authorities, then you should not, in turn, try to deceive this very system dishonestly. This is wrong, not Christian.

In her Facebook, a Russian woman who voted three times, believes that in all this attraction there is no malicious intent. Well, why did you vote then? Why put the ballot in the ballot box if you could not do this? Why did you put a voice? She could have acted quite differently - again, by law. In addition, the woman believes that the irresponsible employee of the embassy, ​​whom she framed, is to blame. Again, then it was necessary to bring the matter to an end: to publicize his name, seek internal verification, leave his superiors to trial. But no, the woman is justified by the fact that she is just a fine fellow and she needs to be praised, and not threatened with a criminal case. Wait a minute, but you broke the law. Or in such cases can be violated?

In this situation, I see an absolutely clear, albeit thin line. Take the ballot - one, two, three, how much they give, - record all this, take pictures, but don’t vote all these times. Do you want to cast your vote four times or check how the system works? And here he himself violated, and encouraged the unlawful actions of his still underage daughter.

Go vote, vote as you like, but - again - without breaking the law. Check the system, go observers, generally do whatever your heart desires, if it does not shine for a period or a fine. This is social responsibility and civic awareness. And not a substitution of facts: they say, I wanted the best, they themselves are guilty that they were mistaken.

Your voice is important, do not devalue it with a stupid joke for a minute hype.

For example, I was wondering if it would be possible to find a joint in the voting system. I went to the site after I voted online. And now I confess: if, having arrived there, I discovered that I can vote a second time, I would not vote again. But she would call the public headquarters for election observation, would report violations, would write to their social networks. And if there were any provocations or aggression from the members of the election commission, then the police would have been called. But - once again - for a compromise, I would not go for a deal with my conscience for anything.

I would sit there, on this site in New Moscow, until blue in the face, until I figured out who was to blame and wait for mobile groups and journalists to come together. Would have fun in the name of law and truth. And that would be normal, because I would know that I did nothing wrong or sinful. And it should be a shame only to those who would have just made a mistake, but to those who did not want to correct the situation in any way. 

An ideal voting system, as well as anything perfect, does not exist. The human factor or a jamb in the system of electronic elections is normal. Everything has an error, even for super expensive and supposedly accurate technologies and computers. But the way manufacturers and developers of these very systems will behave after identifying bugs: whether they fix them and roll out an update or send you, is an indicator.

The man sitting at the polling station, like us, is faced with electronic voting in general for the first time. He, perhaps, did not even think that someone would go to vote twice and thrice.

That's what Peskov said: if you make such statements to improve the electoral system, then you have no price. And if you stand all this of yourself in a white coat, considering yourself ideal and infallible, and throw stones at the one who created the new and yet not yet tested system, then shame on you, dude. You’re not a patriot.

I just don’t understand what you want to achieve. Confessions of illegitimacy? Do not be this. Since the total percentage of such inaccuracies is important here. Want to refuse electronic voting and return exclusively to paper? Well then you are idiots standing in the way of progress. It turns out that the government is actually more open to innovation than the liberal public, which is ridiculously simple in itself.

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.