Re: Questions from election officials

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 16:45:53 CDT

At 2:36 PM -0700 5/3/04, Alan Dechert wrote:
>> I agree we should not stay on the side lines. We should also not
>> have changes to the standards (or even worse, the standards process)
>> be on the critical path of getting our system adopted.
>To a certain extent, we have no choice in the matter. For the most part
>recommendations, standards etc. just don't cover the OVC system. We have to
>get involved in this aspect.

As much as possible, we should avoid trying to avoid the process.
For example, trying to make hardware substitutions is not something
specific to the OVC's approach, so we should avoid trying to make
such a change as part of the critical path to adoption.

> > Of course, we should propose changes to the standards and the
>> standards process. But we will never "own" the process, and we have
>> to pass the current processes to join the club first.
>We may never "own" the process. But to be successful, we will have to get
>seriously involved in the process. Otherwise, the likes of ES&S, Diebold,
>Sequoia, and Hart Intercivic will use their own influence with standards
>bodies to keep us out.

We can make proposals, and we can get grass roots to get our proposals adopted.

Best regards,

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT