[E-voting] Commission on Electronic Voting
Casey, Dermot (GE Consumer Finance)
Dermot.Casey at ge.com
Thu Mar 11 14:06:40 GMT 2004
In relation to the cost issue I'd have to agree with Colm. It has no place in this submission (see below) [is does in the wider debate however]
>From the ad in the Irish Times
This bit is in BOLD
"The Commission on Electronic Voting invites the public to make submissions to its work, on the secrecy and accuracy of the chose Nedap/Powervote electronic voting system and the testing thereof"
"Persons interested in making submissions should note that the Commission will only consider submissions falling within the scope of its terms of reference as outlined above"
"Submissions received will be open to public inspection"
>From this submissions should only deal with the core issues and not side issues, or else risk getting rejected.
>>From: e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net
>>[mailto:e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net]On Behalf Of Colm
>>Sent: 11 March 2004 12:40
>>To: Catherine Ansbro
>>Cc: e-voting at lists.stdlib.net
>>Subject: Re: [E-voting] Commission on Electronic Voting
>>On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 12:19:00PM +0000, Catherine Ansbro wrote:
>>> Great list, Colm.
>>> 4. Perhaps also suggest the need for publicly identifying (in an
>>> unambiguous way) who will be financially accountable for
>>any problems that
>>> result in increased costs to the government due to
>>> etc. (e.g., will Irish taxpayers have to pay the price if
>>> messed up and results are invalid, or if there are legal challenges
>>> following suspected inaccuracies? This could fit in the accuracy
>>> remit--i.e., implications of actual or suspected inaccuracies.)
>>Personally I think raising cost as an issue is a bad idea, and I'm not
>>sure that liability issues fall within the remit of the commision. If
>>the commision is to be independent enough to recommend abondoning it
>>for an election, then it probably shouldnt be worrying about liability
More information about the E-voting