(US) 5/06 - The sitting duck environm...

Author Message   Brant Lamb Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant Username: Brantl Post Number: 584 Registered: 01-2005 Best of Black Box?  Votes: 1 (A keeper?) Posted on Thursday, May 25, 2006 - 9:37 am:        This has made some appearances as a minor theme in many of the threads here, I guess that I would feel a little better if it was stated baldly and independantly of all the circumstances in which it comes into play. It is this: we have elections in places, using equipment and procedures that are in all ways known before the fact. Also, it is expected that people that will serve on BOEs and as poll workers probably have strong political opinion and may well be partisan. (Law enforcement people call this opportunity, lack of alibi and motive!) This means that the security of the outcome of an election is a sitting duck unless significant and exceptionally alert attention is paid to procedures to prevent willful/accidental, insider/outsider corruption of the ballots or their counting. It also means that thinking like a paranoid is fairly appropriate. We can't suddenly change where the election precincts are going to be. We can't suddenly drastically change procedure or equipment for the sake of unpredictability. How can you attract non-polictical people to monitor elections and why should you trust their word that they aren't? When our government was small, and the benefits of public office were relatively small as well, we didn't have as much reason for election fraud as we do now (although we still had election fraud, I think mostly due to zealotry). But now, with the potential to benefit enormously from elected office, the worst are now attracted to this area of illicit behavior and how found a field full of tools to work from and a flawed, thoughtless investment in security available to try to thwart them, and the circumstances that result are as we see them to be now. My question is: what shifts (in policy/procedure/equipment), be they fundamental or not, need to be made to protect the duck?   mac Sperry Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant Username: Littlemac Post Number: 129 Registered: 12-2004 Best of Black Box? N/A Votes: 0 (A keeper?) Posted on Monday, May 29, 2006 - 6:59 pm:        >>>it also means that thinking like a paranoid is fairly appropriate. <<< There is a fine line between paranoia and caution. Further, that line exists and is different for every viewer. The points you make above are fundamental. Things many in this forum don't, or won't deal with. They prefer the tangible complexity of DOEs, paper ballots, open/closed source code and such. They either feel comfortable with complexity, or they know those who are interested in the vote issue and just lurk in these forums prefer complexity. In the latter case "fundamentals" and simplicity get a little too close to the truth for these people/mac

All original content on this website is Copyright (c) 2008-2009 by Black Box Voting. All rights reserved.
Forums powered by Discus Professional - www.discusware.com.
Original site and logo design is by Andy Markley - art101.com.