Re: California SB 1438

From: Nathan L. Adams <adamsn79_at_bellsouth_dot_net>
Date: Fri Jul 16 2004 - 22:44:53 CDT

On Thursday 15 July 2004 10:27 pm, charlie strauss wrote:
> I think one can finesse this whole word play.

Others definitely will. The OVC definitely should not.

> I claim that OVC NEVER
> stores the ballot electronically. The ballot is not a ballot until it is
> cast by placing it in the ballot box. While you might colloquially
> finalizing your on-screen choices as "casting" a ballot but it''s not
> fficiall cast till its in the ballot box. The only think that is ever cast
> is a peice of paper. The electonic vot is never cast. the ballot is never
> stored electronically.

I believe the legal definition of the ballot is simply the voter's intention,
or perhaps it should be. We should not be "finessing" the FACT that we store
the voter's intention electronically before printing it to paper. Honesty and
frankness lead to better security.

> the only thing stored electroincally is the audit trail.
>
> Ultimately Alan put it best
>
> DRE:
> electroinc ballot with potential paper pseudo-audit trail
>
> OVC:
> paper ballot with electronic audit trail
>
> its all in there.
>

I like Alan's definition over Doug's.

Nathan
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sat Jul 31 23:17:05 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jul 31 2004 - 23:17:15 CDT