Re: OVC-discuss Digest, Vol 22, Issue 7

From: Jerry Lobdill <lobdillj_at_charter_dot_net>
Date: Mon Aug 07 2006 - 15:21:37 CDT

Jim,

I'll do it.

Jerry Lobdill

At 02:00 PM 8/7/2006, you wrote:
>Message: 2
>Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 00:17:37 -0700
>From: Jim March <jmarch@prodigy.net>
>Subject: [OVC-discuss] A task someone might take on before the Votepad
> hearing
>To: CEPN <CalifElectionProtection@yahoogroups.com>, Voting-Rights
> <Voting-Rights@yahoogroups.com>
>Message-ID: <44D6E911.4010805@prodigy.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Folks,
>
>I'm in the middle of writing my input to the SecState's office on the
>Hart/Votepad certifications. I've got enough else on my plate that
>while I can see an opportunity, I can't take advantage myself. If
>anyone has a few hours...
>
>Short form, we need to look for possible bias in the disability user
>reports on the votepad.
>
>To do that, we can look at the reports themselves:
>
>http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/exit_surveys_day1.pdf
>
>http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/voting_systems/exit_surveys_day2.pdf
>
>Source:
>
>http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_vs.htm
>
>In those two PDFs we have the reports by disabled persons.
>
>We need to make up a chart, probably a basic spreadsheet, showing the
>following:
>
>* Test voter number (upper right corner)
>
>* Whether the tester was generally positive or negative towards the
>votepad - sort of a judgement call but it's generally pretty easy to
>discern.
>
>* Whether they've tested other voting machines or not.
>
>* What organizations they're with (note when this is left blank)
>
>* Where they heard about the test (note when this is left blank)
>
>With that in "quick reference" form we can try and make a stab at
>identifying biases. I am particularly interested in any correlation
>between "tested other voting machines" and "panned the votepad", for
>this reason: some in the disability community see electronic voting
>machines as a visible symbol of disability freedom. Somebody spoke up
>like that in Arizona on Friday (Pima County Board of Supes voting on
>Diebold TSx) and it's been a long-standing refrain of the National
>Federation of the Blind.
>
>Such a chart will help us look for those sorts of biases. Should be no
>more than a couple hour's work, publish the spreadsheet, we'll have a
>better feel for what's going on. If nobody volunteers by tomorrow
>night...sigh, I'll try and get to it. Whaaaa.
>
>------------
>
>In other news: my commentary on Votepad will focus on the apparant
>radical difference in treatment between Votepad being allowed to get
>involved in their test process and Diebold get invited into theirs.
>Diebold outright designed a test protocol passed along verbatim by Bruce
>McDannold at one point (December of '05) and I'll be focused on that
>hard...I have a copy of Diebold's "proposed test protocol" of that date.
>
>I'm going to unload on the SecState's office rather severely :).
>
>Jim March

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. ProgressiveNews2Use has no affiliation
whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is
ProgressiveNews2Use endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers
and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating
pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions
posted on ProgressiveNews2Use may not match the versions our readers
view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Thu Aug 31 23:17:04 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 31 2006 - 23:17:10 CDT