RE: electronic voting tomorrow

As The Daily Show on Comedy Central calls it, "Indecision 2004: Prelude
to a Recount".


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: electronic voting tomorrow
> From: "Dan Bale" <dbale@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, November 01, 2004 4:42 pm
> To: "Midrange Systems Technical Discussion" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> I trust paper ballots far, FAR more than electronic ballots.  Not even
> close.  No contest.
> 
> As I see it, the big difference between paper and electronic is that with
> paper, you always have the physical evidence.  You can see why there are
> unexpected discrepancies and the causes (hanging chads, etc.)  I can look at
> my ballot and match it up to the legend that I punched it from.  (And I
> always do this.)
> 
> With electronic voting, no one, with the *possible* exception of the
> person(s) who wrote the programs, knows what happens exactly when a screen
> button is pushed.  A vote bit is sent through a gamut of instructions for
> which there are zero auditing capabilities.  It lands in a pool, hopefully,
> and in the right pool, hopefully.  If someone screams "cheat!", how will
> anyone ever verify?  To my knowledge, the auditing capabilities are totally
> insufficient.
> 
> If you're cynical about what happens to a paper ballot after you return it
> to be counted, well then, you're not doubting the technology so much as you
> are the people responsible for ensuring every vote counts.  This type of
> cynicism precedes our lifetime.
> 
> Overall, if "the people" lose the trust of the electoral process, it is an
> open invitation to anarchy.
> 
> Who's giving odds that this election won't go before the Supreme Court
> again?
> 
> db
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx / rob@xxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 4:21 PM
> >
> > Nothing is trusted anyway.  Not paper ballots.  Not mechanical paper
> > ballots (hanging chads).  Nothing.  There will always be an argument
> > saying why it's bad.  Thus, should all attempts to improve be permanently
> > shelved?  After all, if it's all going to be tied up in the
> > courts anyway,
> > why spend the money on trying to improve the equipment when it could be
> > better spent on something less controversial?
> >
> > Rob Berendt
> 
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.