Having to ask for a paper ballot intimidates plenty of people, especially the kind of people who don't want anyone to know they might not conform to the norm. I'm sure anyone with the moxie to want to cast a write-in vote can work through the learning process of spinning a dial and hitting the button when it's where you want it.

The gain in weak-willed non-conformists will surely offset the loss in technophobes. Think of all the Walter Mittys emboldened by the privacy of the curtain who never would have had the guts to make an exception of themselves.

Betty makes a good point, and one that certainly would apply to my 84 year old mother. However this is an important flip side to this that leads me to favor the new machines when all things are considered. Under the old system asking for a paper ballot often did remove "secret" from secret ballot. In usual times there will be very few write-in candidates. And most people will opt to file on time after the present chaos is resolved. Thus most of the time any of the election workers and many in the voting area would know, or at least infer with a pretty good chance of being right, that the voter opted for a (or often "the only" write-in candidate). Think of the last city election when asking for a paper ballot telegraphed a vote for Ms. Tucker. Having the ability to vote for a write-in on the machine is a real positive for the integrity of the ballot. I don't think there is anything remotely unconstitutional about not providing paper ballots and understand the decision to avoid them this time. I did the practice today and found it very intuitive. However I do think a few folks will need help, especially if they want to use the write-in option.

I think this will intimidate some people into voting for the candidates whose names are on the ballot.

I don't think you are the first person to consider that. A skeptical person might think this is by design. Wonder if that is why there are no paper ballots?