Re: Ms. Tobi's overheated rhetoric

From: David Jefferson <d_jefferson_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Sat Nov 03 2007 - 03:31:03 CDT

On Nov 2, 2007, at 11:38 PM, Jim March wrote:

> On Nov 2, 2007 10:44 PM, David Jefferson <>
> wrote:
>> David Jefferson wrote,
>> Whether Ms. Tobi is familiar with what goes on in the behind-the-
>> scenes
>> arena or not is irrelevant. There is absolutely no support for her
>> outrageous statements even in the public arena. There is no
>> "elitist movement among technologists to yank our elections out
>> of the populist muck",
>> and there are absolutely no public statements by technologists
>> that support that idea. Ms. Tobi, or someone, just made that up.
>> Likewise, there do not exist any
>> "self appointed experts ... [who] ... are drowning in their own
>> self
>> created illusion that a high tech, complexified, opaque, and
>> expertified election system can meet the standards for a free
>> and open democracy".
>> Who the hell is she talking about?
> For God's sake David, exhibit "A" is David Dill.

What exactly is your point about David Dill? I challenge you to find
anything he has ever said or written that remotely resembles Ms.
Tobi's characterization. I find it truly bizarre that you would use
Dill, who is one of the half dozen strongest national leaders in
the U.S. opposing electronic voting and demanding auditable
systems, as an example in support of Ms. Tobi's remarks. How do
you possibly justify that?

> So which computer scientist does the county drag out here to the
> desert to talk about the urgent need for "Security By Obscurity" as an
> "expert witness"?
> Merle King, comp. sci. professor from Kenessaw U. in Georgia. This is
> the partner of Brit Williams who helped set up the Georgia Diebold
> system featuring all the worst possible ideas in electronic voting: a
> total conversion in '02 to the Diebold TS paperless DRE.

Perhaps Prof. King is someone to whom Ms. Tobi might have been
referring, but if so we are not talking about the same people. He
has very little influence except reflected from Williams. His ideas are
not on the ascendant at all. He and Williams, represent the dead end
of the line for their ideas on voting systems.

> So Professor Jefferson, don't you dare tell me there aren't
> "academics" who are adamantly opposed to "the little people" (those
> who don't have comp. sci. degrees and NDAs) being able to audit
> elections. Don't. You. Dare. We have ALL run into such critters if
> we've worked this issue long enough and if you had your eyes open or
> your "integrity flag" set to [/ON] you'd see it too.
> Nancy Tobi was anything but "hysterical".

Do not accuse me of calling anyone "hysterical". What I said is that
she doesn't
know what she is talking about, at least in today's remarks, and that
her comments
were outrageous and offensive and the opposite of the truth. I did
not call use any
adjectives for her at all, let alone "hysterical". I have never even
met her.

Do you think that Prof. King, or King plus Williams, constitute "an
movement among technologists to yank our elections out of the populist
There is no such "movement among technologists". There are a small
handful of
visible technologists with views like King's, no more than about 5 in
the U.S.,
and their numbers are not growing. If there is a "movement" among
technologists, it
is the growing force in many states demanding transparency and
auditability, in the
complete opposite direction from Williams and King. I think Prof.
King is wrong in
critical ways, and I do not admire Georgia's election practices, which
I think are at
the bottom of the nation. But this one example of Prof. King (or two
if we throw in
Williams) does not justify the nonsense that Ms. Tobi wrote.

And, Jim, where do you get off writing to me (or anyone else)
something as
high handed and pseudo-threatening sounding as

        "Don't. You. Dare." ?

Do you think I am unnerved by that?


OVC-discuss mailing list
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Fri Nov 30 23:17:06 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 23:17:31 CST