RE: FAQ # 8

From: Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) <"Popkin,>
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 08:27:13 CST

To clarify, I was thinking of "hardware vendors" as being manufacturers of
systems or components that could run OVC, such as a touchscreen
manufacturer, a printer manufacturer, or a systems manufacturer that decided
to sell a line of hardware based on OVC. I agree that we wouldn't want a
manufacturer of proprietary voting hardware on our board, unless they
decided that they could sell their platform running OVC software instead of
or in addition to their proprietary platform. This may seem unlikely, but
doesn't seem impossible -- IBM and HP are major Linux vendors these days, so
anything can happen. :-)

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Arthur
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [voting-project] FAQ # 8


Well put. I also want to make sure that doing so doesn't, as per
your example, put other vendors of touch screen panels at a


At 8:20 PM -0800 12/12/03, Alan Dechert wrote:
>No need to contradict either you or Laird.... but Laird did not say "voting
>hardware vendor." He just said hardware vendor.
>I agree with both of you. I doubt a vendor of proprietary voting hardware
>would make a good OVC board member. But a hardware vendor -- say of touch
>screen panels -- might make a good one.
>Alan D.
>> It may make sense to have vendors on the board that agree to the
>> tenets of the Open Voting Consortium. However, vendors of
>> "traditional" closed source, proprietary DREs will likely not agree
>> to those tenets. And unless they do, I would not want any of them on
>> the board.
>> Arthur
>> At 5:32 PM -0500 12/12/03, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
>> >This is just one person's opinion, but I like the idea that we have
>> >a few hardware vendors on the board.
>> >

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Wed Dec 31 23:17:12 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 31 2003 - 23:17:19 CST