Re: Experts with credentials vs. experts without credentials

From: Danny Swarzman <danny_at_stowlake_dot_com>
Date: Sat Nov 03 2007 - 13:22:40 CDT

Maybe it would help to be more specific. Instead of saying 'expert',
we should specify what expertise is being discussed.

There are huge numbers of people who are capable of reading and
understanding a program written in Java or C or some other popular
language. Is it really correct to call such people 'experts'.

People who spend time studying computer security are in a different
class. Some of them are academics. They are usually not experts in
developing software. They are the ones to whom the SoS goes for reviews.

Let's try to keep the distinctions more clear.

-Danny

On Nov 3, 2007, at 8:23 AM, Michelle Gabriel wrote:

> I really think that the election integrity movement needs both experts
> with and experts without credentials. Those with the credentials are
> working and lobbying on one level. Those without the credentials are
> working and lobbying on another level. I think the issue here is not
> the outliers that will always exist on both sides - the Brit
> Williams on
> the expert side and those that want the end of Microsoft ( I am
> describing this in a clumsy manner, please excuse me) on the other
> side.
>
> The non experts are in the trenches -monitoring and fighting. We
> have
> lots of real, actual, in the field evidence. And often looking at the
> systems and the code. The experts are looking at this from a
> different
> angle - when allowed to look at systems, showing their flaws.
>
>
> _
> I really think the issue here is mutual respect and real listening on
> both sides._
>
> The non experts are writing letters to the editors, talking to
> reporters, trying to counter the spin on the news., monitoring the
> elections.
> I don't think this is what the experts are doing. The experts are
> providing the fodder for the advocates and activists to use.
>
> If we could really combine our forces rather than fighting each other,
> we would be so much more powerful.
>
> I sometimes feel that there are stereotypes on both sides that prevent
> this.
>
> Some people, esp. those making the purchasing decisions, lump the
> advocates all into the tin foil hat, ranting and raving, crowd. They
> don't listen and don't change until the noise, rhetoric, and
> lobbying of
> their managers, and law suits rises to a point where they might lose
> their jobs. And these people, who have the power, don't lump all
> experts
> together. They pick the expert that backs up their position. They
> don't
> really look through the data and come to a conclusion themselves.
>
> I would like to see the experts become more involved in being a public
> voice. I would love to see the experts write Op-Ed pieces over and
> over
> again with what they know, in terms that those not steeped in this,
> could understand. I would love to see the experts consult with the
> advocates and vice versa.
>
> Here is another case in point.
> I am deeply disappointed in Verified Voting. In the November 2006
> election they asked for people to fill out lengthy forms on key
> aspects
> of the election systems. To gather data from county officials and from
> monitoring. I have never seen anything come from that - no report, no
> followup, etc. Here was a chance for experts to interact with
> advocates. Why did I waste my time doing this?
>
> IMHO.
>
> mg
>
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list
> OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
> 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 http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/
> voting-project/
>
>

_______________________________________________
OVC-discuss mailing list
OVC-discuss@listman.sonic.net
http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/ovc-discuss
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 http://gnosis.python-hosting.com/voting-project/
==================================================================
= 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 23:17:07 2007

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