OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

election-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [election-services] Defining a trusted voting process - one disabilities concern


The system I'm envisioning here I believe transforms access to

Here's why.   Today (in the US) they are polling station-centric.

We know that critically restricts access - and in some areas its
deliberate - they only put one or two machines at the station
for 1,000's of voters.

Now - given that instead of proprietary vendor solutions we
have an open framework and process.  Now any vendor can
implement to the spec's and get their voting system approved
for use.  Some examples would be - cell phone companies,
broadband TV companies, local libraries, ISP's, and banks.

This is what the (Alternate) slide is attempting to convey
(I just gave one media - without showing remote
printing options, etc, for other devices).

With this level of access we enter a new age of citizenry
involvement in the political decision process.

And because we know we have a trusted process - we
can be vigilant to ensure that it works and that abuses are
minimized.  That builds public trust and familiarity.

Right now public trust is in the lavatory - since it is
widely assumed the eVoting systems have manipulated
the election results here in the USA - and each voter
has no way of knowing how their vote was actually
counted.  And this is because there is no formal
definition of what constitutes a trusted voting process.

Instead vendors are hawking proprietary systems that
use technology gimmicks like cyptography and special
coding systems to offer a chirade of legitimacy that
cannot be verified - especially as few accept open
source requirements  (even with open source - it is
still possible to cheat - by embedding the rogue
routines as part of the OS libraries or firmware).

Worldwide this also has huge considerations.  The US
is spending $400+ billion to bring democracy to Iraq.
And we just saw what happened in Ukraine recently.
Then there are countries like Zimbabwe where voter
intimidation are the norm.

With so much at stake we cannot assume that people
will not spend significant sums to cheat.  Therefore
only by having a secure process can we ensure trust
 - so that the process itself - as best we can make it -
is self-defending - as we see with other systems
today like banking and so on.

Having trusted voting systems available worldwide
provides the means to safeguard citizens from the
abuses and excesses we see today.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Dodds" <dodds@conmergence.com>
To: "'Paul Spencer'" <paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk>; "'David Webber (XML)'"
<david@drrw.info>; <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 9:12 AM
Subject: RE: [election-services] Defining a trusted voting process - one
disabilities concern

FWIW: The discussion I've seen in the disabilities community has been over
the import of the paper receipt. What doesn't seem to be brought up is that
a lot of polling places aren't accessible -- and even when they are, there
isn't enough accessible transportation to get those with disabilities to the
polls. While I praise the ideal of universally accessible polling places my
cynicism says they and the paper ballot issue are currently (functionallly)
being used as a red herring issue put out by those who don't want the
disabilities community to seriously consider UUID voting by the net, phone,
fax, ATM, IM, email, set top box, what have you -- and as a result -- FWD
are currently unable to vote and would be for the foreseeable future -- if
the transportation issue isn't met -- and there is no political will to do
so -- because folks with disabilities can't vote for it. (Anyone want to
ride on my vicious cycle? :-))

Ed Dodds

>I think paper is a red herring to placate a few Luddites. Far more
important is the issue of intimidation, which applies to many systems
including postal votes.

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]