Re[2]: [ICANN-EU] Re: You be the Jury (Polling the Lessig- Sondow exchange)

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Joop,

Sunday, September 24, 2000, 6:27:00 PM, you wrote:

> I went ahead and designed and commissioned  the Polling Booth. I make its
> use available for free. If it is going to be open source, I would like to
> be paid what it is worth. Fair? It is quite complex with a lot of
> functionality.

So is a lot of open source software.  What is your point?

> Auditing is a different matter.
> Auditing votes is opening a can of worms at the best of times.
> Voters want results. Any auditing process, unless it is needed to determine
> the outcome of a power struggle, is a holdup for the voters.
> It puts those who are demanding audits in control, especially if there are
> no detailed rules for an auditing process.

What rules do you need?  You check the votes against the voting
results, and the auditors reserve the right to spot check votes, to
verify that the person in question did indeed vote as indicated.
Lastly, independent verification of the voters rolls.  With your IDNO
you are the only person who holds the voting rolls, and are the sole
voice to the membership.  We have to take your word that those members
even exist, much less that they voted.

This is why these things should NEVER be vested in the control of any
one person or small group of like minded people.

> It also endangers the anonymity of a vote.
> This is the reason why so often members of associations vote by acclamation
> for destruction of the Ballot papers.

Please.  The anonymity of the vote is already compromised because YOU
can tell who voted how.  All this does is shift that to a group of
independent auditors, who of course are bound to maintain
confidentiality unless foul play is discovered.

> In the meantime, cheap unsubstantiated slander against independent Polling
> resources, without ever providing an alternative is not helping democracy.

No slander, Joop. I've only stated the facts.  When what I described
occurred once or twice, it was just coincidence not worth of mention.
When it happened in the exact same fashion, with the same results,
numerous times, it becomes a pattern that cannot be ignored, and
certainly justifies suspicion.  Your iron grip control only further
provides a justification for suspicion.  Your own power and control
complex works against your credibility.

> If WXW sees a vote going against him in real time, perhaps he should
> consider the feedback effect that real time result publishing has.

Sorry, Joop, but that has no result against the person controlling the
polling booth have the potential for manipulating the results.

> Real Time results is a feature that can be turned on or off, in accordance
> with the will of the voters.

And again only leads to further suspicion.

-- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com