Re: [OVC-discuss] Integrating two solutions (related to the Calif. bill thread)

From: Edward Cherlin <echerlin_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Thu Jan 22 2009 - 04:04:17 CST

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Ronald Crane <voting@lastland.net> wrote:
> Preventing occasionally-significant ballot ambiguity is not remotely worth
> the security risks of leaving the general voting population alone with
> computational ballot presentation, selection, and recording devices.

As far as I can make out, Ronald, what you are saying is that you want
nothing to do with the OVC system, which is designed as an Open Source
ballot marker with cryptographic security, and that you want only
manually marked ballots. That is, from my point of view, you wish to
be part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. Why, then,
are you here?

> The
> Minnesota process has taken awhile, but so?

That is an appalling question. If you don't understand the costs and
dangers of the Minnesota process, I can't explain them to you. Time is
the least of the problems.

> Further, much of the process has
> involved legal arguments over whether to count various categories of
> absentee ballots, not the interpretation of the ballots themselves.

A complete irrelevance. Most of the arguments have been over
interpreting the intent of the voter, and the intent of the Minnesota
legislature. We need technical standards created by those who
understand the technical issues as a basis for any technical system
that purports to fulfill the trust of the people. Few will understand
the innards of such systems, but we thought we could make it clear to
the non-technical public why they can trust a system that they can
test independently of the experts. You appear to be a counterexample
to that thought.

> As for under/over-vote issues, these can be addressed much more securely by
> using precinct scanners.

Balderdash. They are issues of _voting_, not of counting.

> We need voting systems that most members of the general public can
> effectively supervise,

There are no such systems. We are trying to create one.

> not systems chock-a-block with vulnerabilities whose
> depths even experts can't plumb.

Precisely. It appears to me that you don't know enough to judge
whether any system meets your own criteria. We believe that the OVC
system comes closer to your ideal than any other, and far closer than
these feeble suggestions of yours.

> -R
>
> Edward Cherlin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Ronald Crane <voting@lastland.net> wrote:
>
>
> Why not (1) hand-filled paper ballots for the general voting population;

Let me try again. They are inherently unreliable at best, and subject
to fraud of many kinds at worst. You appear to be in denial about the
long-known, heavily documented deficiencies of manually-marked paper
ballots.

> See Minnesota. We need ballot markers that will produce clean,
> indisputable ballots. No overvotes, no unintentional undervotes, no
> extra marks, and so on.
>
> Also, see "Landslide" Lyndon Johnson for only one example of why paper
> is inherently hackable.
>
>
>
> (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?
>
>
> Fine.
>
>
>
> -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:....
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>

-- 
Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name
And Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, The Truth my destination.
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/User:Mokurai
_______________________________________________
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/
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