Reasonable level of errors?

From: David Webber \(XML\) <"David>
Date: Sun Jun 19 2005 - 14:05:25 CDT

Ed,

I would say that there should be no known errors. That
all anomolies should be accounted for and that the
software and process should be designed to be fail-safe
to allow humans to identify and diagnose problems.

Fault diagnostics are at the heart of good engineering
and robust systems.

Therefore - at the point the election result is
pronounced there should be no known errors. In
addition - notice that elections are pronounced where
the result can be determined beyond reasonable
doubt - eg - if one candidate has received sufficient
votes so that it is mathematically impossible for their
opponents to exceed that total; and where the
election officials are able to determine this directly.

Anyway - what the Trusted Logic Voting (TLV) is
looking to do is provide that level of precision -
by giving three distinct and separate records during
the voting process - that can be cross-referenced.

Most importantly this is a 100% audit built-in so
that every vote counted has been corroborated
by three separate chains of auditable records. If
any of the three record chains does not match - then
this triggers action to determine why and remediate
accordingly.

DW

_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:09 2005

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