RE: Open Source Quality

From: james_in_denver <james_in_denver_at_hotpop_dot_com>
Date: Tue May 11 2004 - 10:43:26 CDT

Well, the reason I bring a database into the picture is that at some
point the votes will need to be tabulated and verified. It is my
understanding that OVC's mission is to provide public review of the
entire voting process. If that is the case then at some point a public
review of how the votes were actually counted might be important.

James

On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 10:59, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
> Glad to hear it. It'd add significant complexity...
>
> - LP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-voting-project@afterburner.sonic.net
> [mailto:owner-voting-project@afterburner.sonic.net]On Behalf Of David
> Mertz
> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 9:51 PM
> To: voting-project@lists.sonic.net
> Subject: Re: [voting-project] Open Source Quality
>
>
> On May 10, 2004, at 9:37 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:
> > It's not clear we need a database at all at the polling place.
>
> I'd go so far as to say that it's clear we DO NOT need a database at
> the polling place.
>

==================================================================
= 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 23:17:34 2004

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