Re: What is voter anonymity?

From: Alan Dechert <alan_at_openvotingconsortium_dot_org>
Date: Wed May 05 2004 - 21:33:04 CDT

David,

> On May 5, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Alan Dechert wrote:
> > I see great benefits to disclosure. The strongest case against
> > disclosure was brought out by Doug Jones: Someone could "sign" their
> > ballot with, for example, an add combination of yes/no votes to don't
> > care judicial retention
>
> Actually, I'm pretty sure I was the first to suggest that attack on
> this list. Quite possibly, however, Doug already thought of it before
> the list even existed.
>
Well, not to put too fine a point on this one, but, yes, the precursor of
the voting-project list included Doug Jones, Arnie Urken, David Dill, and
others several months before the voting-project list. And the precursor of
that list was ... and so on. Doug has brought this up several times over
the last year.

> ......... There's no point in
> further discussing whether OVC members want to do this, since that's
> the law.
>
I think I agree with most things you have to say, David. However, your
recitation of "it's the law" is a bit pedantic. The law has changed a lot
over the years. And it will change some more in years to come. The OVC
should not remain passive subjects of "the law," especially in the case of
election law where there are many gaps, inconsistencies, irrelevancies,
absurdities, and so on.

Paperless ("invisible") ballots should be illegal. People are taking steps
to correct the law. The OVC should be involved in this and other necessary
and important changes in election code.

Alan D.
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:19 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT