On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 18:46, Joop Teernstra wrote: > At 06:05 a.m. 2/04/2003, espresso@e-scape.net wrote: > > >It's also one of the reasons I believe an e-mail ballot is > >preferable - one reaches more people fairly quickly and people > >can respond more easily than by spending time looking at one > >Web page after another. Some would disagree with me on that > >but I think it is worth a try and could hardly get a lower > >response rate than the recent poll. > > I hope you are aware of the fact that the voting members in majority think > differently. > Email ballot is not preferred. > It is too easy to fake responses. but remember, your poll only took into account people who have web access with their email. i'm quite concerned the rest will be disenfranchised altogether (even if the number is small). yes, unencrypted form-like email can be less secure and prone to parsing issues (dimpled chads, etc.). But our format and security level can evolve over time (e.g., option to sign/encrypt). For our current election, all we really need is a unique, difficult-to-guess identifier for each email ballot. This is because, today, the need for the lowest barrier to entry outweighs the need for greater security. We can revisit that when we're actually important and have more than township of members. -s
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part