Re: Shamos Rebuttal, Draft 3

From: Ron Crane <voting_at_lastland_dot_net>
Date: Thu May 05 2005 - 21:32:23 CDT

On May 5, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Teresa Hommel wrote:

> Hi Ron,
> Please do NOT list me as an author or contributor to this article.
> I think this project is very important, and this work you have done is
> an excellent beginning. First drafts are the hardest work. But it
> really is only a first draft, and it reads like one, stiff, wordy,
> unfocused, and ready for a second draft. It is ready for another good
> writer, or yourself at a later time, to take this material and focus
> it for a specific audience.
> The reason I do not want to be listed as an author or contributor is
> that as written, the article does not express any of my points of view
> or suggestions. Merely including the word "transparency" a few times
> does not make it clear that democracy is govt of by and for the
> people, and if people cannot effectively or meaningfully observe
> election procedures then those procedures and the entire election lack
> legitimacy.

I mostly agree with this viewpoint and would, if I had the Ring of
Power, require nondisabled voters to cast paper ballots, which would be
counted by hand under the continuous supervision of multipartisan
observers. I don't see this happening, so I am working to make OVC's
open source, open hardware system as secure and private as it can be.

> Also, I think the article is excessively detailed and technical. I
> thought someone wanted to circulate it to legislators or officials in
> PA. I cannot believe that anyone except a techie would read this.

I never have received that degree of guidance about its intended
audience. Unfortunately Shamos makes a great many technical errors,
which must be countered in the technical sphere. If they are not, the
idea that existing e-voting systems are "good enough" (or even
"perfectly good") will continue to resound through the ranks of
politicians and elections officials. That we cannot have.

> Below are three suggestions, and attached is the whole thing with
> edits on the first page.
> Teresa Hommel
> 1. Cut the “amusement” stuff and other emotion-laden or attutude words.

Those words are there not to be snarky, but subtly to counter Shamos's
put-downs and to keep the reader's interest. Nonetheless I'll sleep on
the idea of removing them.

> 2. You have to define what transparency, accountability, and the
> nature of American democracy are. You cannot assume that anyone knows
> what your concept of these abstractions are. I have found that even
> voting rights activists don’t understand the terms well enough to
> evaluate whether a given procedure or law complies or doesn’t.

I have given a very brief background, indicating that skepticism of
government is bedrock. You want much more. I'm not sure it has a place
in this paper, or that many would read it were it written. You find
this stuff interesting, as do I, but for most people it's one big

> Democracy has to be implemented by people, not by computers.  A lot of
> OVC emailers have a problem with this concept. If elections as
> currently being conducted cannot be conducted without computers, then
> the elections should not be conducted that way. The only way to
> achieve election legitimacy is by having multipartisan observers of
> ballot-handling and vote-counting. 

As noted, that would be my preference. But I don't see it happening,
and am trying to make the apparently-inevitable e-voting systems be as
good as they can be. I think OVC's will, with sufficient attention, be
very secure. However, it will always lack the degree of transparency of
hand-counted paper ballots.

> I suggest that you state that democracy and democratic elections have
> to be of, by, and for the people (demos, people), and that elections
> are not a government service or entitlement that someone or some Board
> of Elections or vendor performs for the people.

I think this is obvious.

> 3. Do not refer to the American govt as a republic. It is supposed to
> be a democracy. A republic can be a dictatorship. Just because Shamos
> uses the term doesn’t mean you have to use it.

It is a democratic republic: we elect representatives ("democratic"),
who are accountable to us, and they directly carry out the business of
government ("republic"). It is not a "democracy", because citizens do
not directly carry out the business of government (with certain
exceptions like the initiative or town hall).


OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:22 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT