Re: A 3-Step Audit Protocol w/ 99% confidence

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed Jan 24 2007 - 14:24:00 CST

Joe's points are well taken. However, it is good practice in
scholarly publications to cite related work, and let "credit" be
assigned by the historians of science among us.

Best regards,
Arthur

At 11:53 AM -0800 1/24/07, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
>To be clear: a few of us have been thinking about tiered approaches
>since mid-December. I'm not sure that this lack-of-credit is an
>important thing to dwell on and I don't believe we have enough
>information about any of this to point fingers at individuals for
>thinking about ways to do some chunky approach to confidence levels in
>legislation. -Joe
>
>On 1/24/07, Kathy Dopp <kathy.dopp@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gee, well this makes the third time that Howard has mysteriously
>> replicated my work within a few weeks of my publicly releasing it, and
>> neglected to cite me. (the first time he claimed not to see my prior
>> work and I believed him). I actually told a few people the last two
>> times I did work that I was waiting for Howard and VoteTrustUSA to
>> replicate it afterwards and neglect to cite me because that seems to
>> be their modus-operandi.
>>
>> I actually redid the work of Rivest all by myself but then checked
>> with Rivest and found out that he'd done it previously, so cited
>> Rivest as having done the work first, unlike Howard who seems to be
>> unaware of all my work, even after my frequent conversations with him
>> after the first time he replicated my work and released it without
>> citing me.
>>
>> Kathy
>>
>> On 1/24/07, Ginny Ross <ginnypdx@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > In a follow up post, Howard Stanislevic posted this. I was not able to
>> > forward it earlier because it had not been attached in the forwardable
>> > portion of the post:
>> >
>> > "If you read my paper and Dr. Ron Rivest's paper, they will explain the
>> > whole thing"--
>> > 1. Rivest, On Estimating the Size of a Statistical Audit
>> >
>>http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/%7Erivest/Rivest-OnEstimatingTheSizeOfAStatisticalAudit.pdf
>> > 2. Stanislevic, Random Auditing of E-Voting Systems: How Much is Enough?
>> > http://www.votetrustusa.org/pdfs/VTTF/EVEPAuditing.pdf
>> >
>> > I hope this makes the post more complete. I believe the
>>precinct approach
>> > is still not going to prove effective and need to lobby for intensive
>> > standards such as 99% confidence.
>> >
>> > Ginny Ross
>> _______________________________________________
>> OVC-discuss mailing list
>> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
>>
>
>
>--
>Joseph Lorenzo Hall
>PhD Student, UC Berkeley, School of Information
><http://josephhall.org/>
>_______________________________________________
>OVC-discuss mailing list
>OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
>http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
_______________________________________________
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 Tue Jan 1 14:12:48 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 14:12:51 CST