[E-voting] "Secrecy" and "Accuracy"

Stan Nangle stan at voyager.ie
Thu Mar 25 12:39:33 GMT 2004


[quot]I think it is indisputable that the system as proposed is unverified and poses a 
major threat to democracy. [/quot]

The Commission member reads that, asks Niall Callan if it is true, he says "Of course 
not!", Commission member trusts Niall Callan, report says system is cleared for takeoff.


[quot]If the commission is looking for a back door out, I think it will be along the 
lines of:

 	"There are some doubts about the system, and these need to be
 	looked at, but at this time we think that, on balance, not 
 	using electronic voting would produce a more inaccurate result 
 	(mistakenly spoiled ballots) than using the chosen system."
[/quot]

That would appear to be the objective, however the Civil Servants who thought up this 
ruse do not comprehend the LART concept. Provided the link to the the key words are 
demonstrated, then all the points and angles made in submissions will have to be looked 
at.

I know of three submissions that are going to debunk the "mistakenly spoiled ballots" 
myth completely. 

[quot] We'll see though, they do have reputations to guard and frankly it is going to be 
*very* hard for them to back the system and look credible.[/quot]

Basically, anything that looks like being difficult to deal with will be dismissed as not 
being relevant to the TOR, or, failing that, they will find another "expert" who will 
contradict the point allowing them to rely on Niall Callan's opinion.

[quot]Indeed, although the fact that the secetariate will be publishing all of the 
(presumably accepted) submission means that it would transparently obvious if a relevant 
submission or relevant parts of a submission got rejected :) [/quot]

I think they will stay away from stating their opinion on any specific submission. They 
will use generalisations, carefully crafted by Q4.

I'm looking forward to May 2 already. LOL

S:







More information about the E-voting mailing list