Re: Executive Summary of Proposal to California Secretary of State

From: Ron Crane <voting_at_lastland_dot_net>
Date: Fri Jun 10 2005 - 11:00:56 CDT

On Jun 9, 2005, at 11:39 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:

> At 12:54 PM -0700 6/9/05, Ron Crane wrote:
>> On Jun 9, 2005, at 10:43 AM, Arthur Keller wrote:
> ...
> 3. Accessibility of the phase 2 ballot reader isn't addressed.
> Accessibility is in ballot marking, not ballot reading. Ballots are
> marked for both phases either by hand or through an AutoMark-type
> system.

Well, yes, but some of the disabled will require assistance in putting
their ballot into the precinct-based reader, in interpreting its
actions, and in retrieving their ballot if the reader kicks it out.

>> 4. Page 2's description of what open source means is confusing. The
>> sentence "Because UCTS consists of open source software, anyone -
>> third parties or voters - who might be suspicious of tampering are
>> able to independently validate ballots and vote tallies" seems like a
>> non-sequitur. Open source (with appropriate crypto wrappers and
>> procedures) enables people to obtain significant assurance of
>> software integrity. It doesn't (directly) permit validation of
>> "ballots and vote tallies".
> I'll fix that on the next pass.
>> 6. You need very briefly to describe how all the components will work
>> together with, for example, Diebold paper or Automark.
> This is an executive summary. Not everything needs to be explained,.

Actually a very concise description of how it all works is really
important in an executive summary, so the "executives" understand it
right off the bat and don't get confused trying to put all the pieces
together themselves.


OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Thu Jun 30 23:17:06 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 30 2005 - 23:17:11 CDT