Re: Draft of letter to the EAC

From: David Mertz <voting-project_at_gnosis_dot_cx>
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 12:43:05 CDT

On May 10, 2004, at 1:08 PM, Alan Dechert wrote:
> (like David Mertz, Charlie Strauss, Laird Popkin, and perhaps others).

I would indeed like to be included in such a statement.

A few suggested changes:

> It makes sense that a public process like voting be best served with
> public software.

To me, it does not merely "make sense" in the technocratic sense that
"under many eyes all bugs are shallow." Instead, the openness of the
source code is a matter of procedural democracy.

I know not everyone shares my ideological inclination, but I think we
could be somewhat more forceful while not explicitly going into this
issue:

   It IS PROPER that a public process like voting be best served with
public software.

> Last month we showed our demo voting software to the world.

I believe it would be broader to include:

   ...showed our demo ELECTIONS software...

We also showed (at least early version of) BVA and BRP, which aren't
"voting" per se. And canvassing software is certainly anticipated too,
even if not demoed April 1.

> The Open Voting Consortium is working with states
> and their public universities to get this project launched.

I would change pronoun and verb to be more definitive/active:

   The OVC is working with states and their public
   universities to ADVANCE OUR project.

And similarly,

> The Open Voting Consortium INTENDS TO BE a durable organization...

Per Doug's recent clarification, should we change:

> Aggregating the vote count is complicated by the fact that...

   CANVASSING the vote count is complicated by the fact that...

I hadn't known that was the right word, but I've switched to it on the
list, now that I know.

Yours, David...
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:30 2004

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