Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] Stop Computer Voting In North Carolina

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Paul Smith <paul AT foundryzero.com>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Stop Computer Voting In North Carolina
  • Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:36:29 -0500


On Mar 12, 2004, at 10:03 AM, H. Wade Minter wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, Thomas Beckett wrote:

Rachel Cox wrote:
Yeah, I'm not very excited about electronic voting at this point
myself. I'm eager for the time when I can be, but right now there are
just too many questions for me to be comfortable with it.

Well in North Carolina at least, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The
paper ballot and optical reader system we now use (in Orange, Durham and
Wake at least) works great, and there's a physical ballot and audit
trail. The ballot itself is simple and easy to understand. I have even
witnessed a local election recount on behalf of the Democratic Party and
I think the system works well. I would be extremely suspicious of any
effort to replace this system with anything else.

The big problem as I see it is that the big voting companies like Diebold
are absolutely opposed to, and fighting tooth-and-nail to stop, any sort
of audit trail for their computers. They want zero paper trail for their
voting.

Why on earth would anyone who wants fair elections be so opposed to having
a paper audit trail? That's what gets my suspicions up about e-voting.
They want to take an unproven system and remove any sort of non-electronic
accountability.

Sketchy at best.

- --Wade



To further a very good point, I'll add that I believe that a voting system, electronic or otherwise, should not rely on anything that is secret or proprietary at all. I can certainly respect Diebold's need to protect their IP and internal processes from competitors, but the fact of the matter is that the need for transparency in the voting process far outweighs Diebold's business concerns. The internal workings, software code, accounting systems, equipment inventory and history, audits, reviews, records... all that stuff ought to be right out in the open and subject to public and official scrutiny.
Maybe it's just me, but I wish our leaders were as vigilant about fair and transparent elections as they seem to be about juiced-up overpaid baseball players having an unfair advantage over non-juiced-up overpaid baseball players.

--P

--
Paul Smith
Foundry Zero
919.834.5433
www.foundryzero.com





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page