RE: Ballot publication problem

From: <clintcurtis_at_clintcurtis_dot_com>
Date: Sun May 22 2005 - 16:15:27 CDT

The votes would be a lot safer stored out in front of town hall where
everyone could see them than to be locked away in warehouses only
accessable by those who have the most to gain financially by tampering
with them. Ohio's votes were very secure. So secure than neither
candidates nor lawsuits could view them. So secure than no one will
ever know if their vote was counted.


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Ballot publication problem
> From: David Mertz <>
> Date: Sun, May 22, 2005 3:26 pm
> To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
> <>
> On May 22, 2005, at 2:24 PM, Marty Schrader wrote:
> > Potential criminal acts shouldn't affect whether a particular feature
> > has merit.
> Each time I read this, its disturbing absurdity become stronger.
> What would you think of storing the unlocked ballot box outside
> overnight, in front of the town hall, with a sign on it that said
> "tampering with the ballots in this box is illegal?" (with ballot
> counting to be peformed the next day). As long as no one commits an
> "external criminal act" the system is perfectly safe, right?
> Somehow this seems like a design flaw to me... despite the fact it the
> flaw is only revealed if someone acts criminally.
> _______________________________________________
> OVC discuss mailing lists
> Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to

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 23:17:45 2005

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