[LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing

[David Goldstein]

Richard,

I agree with your concerns. I don't have an issue with them. I don't agree though that it's a case of the companies manufacturing software and hardware who have the largest victory, if that's a possible answer to what you ask/comment on. Those representing the blind and vision impaired were the ones who raised this.

Cheers
David
----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Chirgwin <rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au>
To: link <link at anu.edu.au>
Sent: Friday, 17 November, 2006 10:37:21 AM
Subject: Re: [LINK] Fwd: vip-l: Electronic votiing


David Goldstein wrote:
> The issue is that society in all of its elements - Government, Business and the general community - should work to build an inclusive community. One element of inclusiveness is to care about and accommodate the needs of others.
>
> We do this in many ways - safety rails around the 20th floor balcony, lollipop people on school crossings etc. So yes, things are done differently for people who are blind. But we take into account that things are done differently for children by having the lollipop people at school crossings, by having safety rails on balconies and saying children and the elderly, and anyone else can care for themselves.
>   
So far, so good. I don't see any disputed issue here.
> [snip]
>
> So the issue is how to enable people who are blind and vision impaired to vote. And nobody on this last has a viable alternative. And I don’t see that anyone really has any idea on whether the setup was secure or not. Rather, it’s fear mongering and guesswork.
>   
David, do I have to try abuse to get a response?

The concern I raise is not about security. It's about keeping the 
electoral process in the hands of the entire electorate. This is not a 
form of discrimination against the blind, it's a simple statement that 
all Australians should retain the right to take part in, see, and 
understand the whole process - from "paddock to plate", as it were.

Any electronic system must hide part of the process from some of the 
electorate. If it's open source, it hides part of the process from 
anyone who can't read the code. If it's closed source, it hides part of 
the process from nearly everybody.

A debate can be founded on a reasoned argument, but to say "this is fear 
mongering and guesswork" contributes nothing. I can't speak for others, 
but I am not guessing. I *know* that I am incapable of assessing:

- the quality of the software,
- the security of the network, or
- the honesty of the count.

Do I have a viable alternative? No. Do I believe that this puts me under 
a moral obligation to endorse the Victorian model? No. It's what Yes 
Minister called the politician's syllogism:

- We must do something
- This is something
- Therefore, we must do this.

RC
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com