Re: MORE Questions from election officials

From: Teresa Hommel <tahommel_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 21:27:28 CDT

Hi All,

I can try to write some, and will send whatever I have done on Thursday
or Friday this week. Then someone else can edit and modify it as you
wish. (It is easier to edit than to write!).

Teresa Hommel

"Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp)" wrote:

> Shamos says "It is important to realize what is supposed to be
> accomplished in an audit of a voting machine or election. Ideally, one
> ought to be able to reconstruct the ballots in their entirety, verify
> that no unusual or unauthorized events took place during voting or
> tabulation, and review the correctness of the vote totals. To imagine
> that there is any realistic mechanism to accomplish this is to indulge
> in fantasy. Let me be very clear on this point - no existing voting
> system is auditable. Furthermore, I have never seen a design for an
> auditable system, and doubt that any jurisdiction could afford one if
> it existed."
> When I read that, it sounds like complete gibberish, as it's fairly
> obvious that a voter verified paper trail can be audited, recounted,
> etc. Is there some other meaning of the word "audit" that he's
> referring to? And if so, is there any advantage to his definition over
> what most people mean by auditable?
> It would be useful if someone could dig into this paper and disect it
> -- it's popping up as a reference point for anti-VVPT folks in
> discussions I'm in, and it'd be very useful to have a more formal
> analysis than "he's bonkers".
> Any takers?
> - LP
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of
> charlie
> strauss
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 9:13 PM
> To:
> Subject: [voting-project] MORE Questions from election officials
> Hello again,
> It turns out that while I was speaking with Denise Lamb (director
> NASED) this moring, a freind was coinidentally delivering the
> Mythbreaker's document to Rebecca Vigil-Heron in the same office. She
> is the President Elect of the National Association of Secretaries of
> State, and SOS of New Mexico. She is vehemently opposed to paper
> trails. Unfortunately, I dont beleive she has plans to read it.
> (Coinidentally She's off to euorpe tommorow to propote paperless
> systems there -- good timing regarding the Irish report!).
> Anyhow she handed over the following april 2004 Paper from Carnegie
> Melon as her main scholarly point of reference on the issue.
> by Micheal Ian Shamos, School of computer Sci.
> who also wrote:
> I put these forth for your discussion. If you want to say it's a
> bunch of bog trot and ill posed analogies I'm fine with that, but the
> more specific you are the better I will actually be able to make use
> of your opinions.
> thanks!

= 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 23:17:07 2004

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