Re: Integrating two solutions (related to the Calif. bill thread)

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Thu Jan 22 2009 - 03:25:39 CST

Ron, the draft legislation is agnostic in that regard, as far as I
can tell. It would more easily allow certification of a system like
you propose, just as it would more easily allow a system with the
Dechert architecture.

So let's separate the legislation discussion from the architecture discussion.

Best regards,
Arthur

At 11:00 AM -0800 1/21/09, Ronald Crane wrote:
>Why not (1) hand-filled paper ballots for the general voting
>population; (2) Vote-PADs for the disabled who can use them, and
>OVC-style ballot printers for the disabled who need the extra
>assistance; (3) OVC-style scanners to count the ballots (preferably
>at each precinct); and (4) the Humboldt procedure/hand audits to
>check the counting?
>
>-R
>
>Jim March wrote:
>>Folks,
>>
>>Let's step back a sec and look at the landscape here.
>>
>>There are four reform solutions on the table right now:....

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
By sending email to the OVC-discuss  list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at  http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Thu Jan 7 00:09:49 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 07 2010 - 00:09:57 CST