Re: NY -- Village Voice on Open Source Voting Machines

From: Danny Swarzman <danny_at_stowlake_dot_com>
Date: Fri Nov 16 2007 - 15:15:22 CST

Another level of filtering is that certification isn't practical
unless there is a municipality ready fork over something. Just
getting things in place takes some bucks and trust.

A municipality would want to see the documents and the demonstration
before conditionally committing to it.

-Danny

On Nov 16, 2007, at 1:07 PM, Richard C. Johnson wrote:

> There is no right to have one's machine tested in New York, and, if
> the waiver passes, it will not oblige the state to test anything.
> Instead, the state will have the option to test any system it
> believes suitable, waiving the fee only to the extent that the
> system (1) shows signs of meeting New York requirements and (2) is
> based on Open Source. No marginal systems are likely to be tested,
> since one need only fail a few key tests and a system would be
> disqualified.
>
> Much documentation must be submitted prior to test, including
> specifications, test results, test plans, and so forth. A formal
> application to OGS (the New York purchasing people) is also
> required. A vendor must demonstrate "vendor responsibility" to
> OGS; this means a plausible showing that what the state requires
> can actually be delivered. OVS, a startup, can only meet the
> vendor responsibility requirement by partnering with other larger
> companies.
>
> Not quite a walk in the park, even with the fee waiver. Of course,
> without the fee waiver, there is no chance at all for Open Source
> in New York. The $2M is to cover two systems, a standard system
> and one with enhanced access features. Without the waiver, there
> is no hope at all in New York for Open Source and not much for any
> company without big money behind it.
>
> -- Dick
>
>
>
> charlie strauss <cems@earthlink.net> wrote:
> So what is the right solution? Assuming it actually costs 1 Million
> to test a system how should this be paid. Should states simply
> accept all comers and eat the cost?
>
> Seems like a compromise position might be
> 1) have some sort of filter or initial hearing to reject
> impractical systems
> 2) then high level testing for free.
>
> perhaps the filter could be requests from a sufficient number of
> Clerks for access to the system or past sales in the state.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/

_______________________________________________
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 23:17:25 2007

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