[E-voting] Abstention - an accuracy issue?

Mark Dennehy Mark.Dennehy at cs.tcd.ie
Fri Mar 19 19:22:37 GMT 2004

Ref:[Timothy Murphy, Fri, 19/03/04 @ 14:41 +0000]
> On Friday 19 March 2004 12:44, Karen Devine wrote:
> I don't agree with you.
> More to the point, I don't see how this question comes within
> the commission's terms of reference,
> so I suspect you are wasting your time.

In fairness, that's not because of the worthiness of the idea
of a NOTA vote, it's because of the highly cynical and
downright dishonest manner in which the CEV has been
constructed and instructed. No technically qualified people
serve on the CEV (the head of Siemens is the closest, with a
mechanical engineering degree that he received in the early
seventies, and he's been in management since the late
seventies), the Auditor-General has not been asked to serve
on the CEV, and neither has the Ombudsman. There's also the
question of independence, given that the "civilian" members
of the board earn a tidy sum from other political
appointments which they received from the very politicians
whose policy they're now asked to judge. Further. the terms of
reference are exceptionally narrow to prevent the CEV from
addressing precisely the point that the Minister is
portraying it as being the solution to, namely concerns with
the reliability and accountability of the Powervote system as
proposed for June. 

Given this, I think it's fair to say that a submission
requesting a binding NOTA option may well be in vain - but
it's wrong to take such a dismissive tone to the NOTA
argument itself. 
Mark Dennehy,
Computer Vision and Robotics Research Group,
Computer Science Dept., Trinity College Dublin		
email:	Mark.Dennehy at cs.tcd.ie
www:	http://www.cs.tcd.ie/Mark.Dennehy

More information about the E-voting mailing list