From: Collin (myuupojo.com)
Date: Thu Oct 21 2004 - 11:06:47 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Douschebag, take this off list, nobody but yourself cares what you
think about Kerry or about your topical humor. There are thousands of
other places to discuss this type of crap.

//Voting Nader.

On Oct 21, 2004, at 9:29 AM, Exibar wrote:

> The question comes to mind... why oh why did you cast your vote for
> Kerry?
> I guess you want the US to be policed and governed by the UN. I guess
> you
> want someone in office that can't make up his mind about anything. I
> guess
> you want someone in office that will start to shred the Constitution
> piece
> by piece and change it bit by bit until it reads like the Heinz Ketchup
> bottle ingrediants.
>
> But, it's your vote, you can vote for anyone that you wish, I'll
> defend
> that right to the end, even if Kerry wants to take it away....
>
> My vote will be PROUDLY cast for Bush, just like it was 4 years ago.
>
> Exibar
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Coombs PivX Solutions" <jasoncscience.org>
> To: <Full-disclosurenetsys.com>
> Cc: <infohartic.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 9:24 PM
> Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Will a vote for John Kerry be counted by a
> Hart
> InterCivic eSlate3000 in Honolulu?
>
>
>> I just voted for John Kerry at a walk-in absentee ballot polling
>> place in
> Honolulu County using an eSlate3000 (unit serial number A05A0B) made
> by Hart
> Intercivic: http://www.hartintercivic.com
>>
>> I was told by the official who gave me the choice of voting on paper
>> or
> voting electronically that the electronic voting machines weren't
> supposed
> to be here yet, but that since they arrived in time for the 2004
> election,
> they were being used anyway.
>>
>> Will my vote be counted? That depends on a number of unknowns, such as
> whether or not the unit on which my vote was cast subsequently
> malfunctions,
> rendering the entire vote tabulating memory card corrupt.
>>
>> I did not receive a paper printout following the submission of my
> electronic ballot.
>>
>> Excluding the obvious possibility that fraud may occur, either to
>> stuff
> the electronic 'ballot box' with false votes, or to intentionally
> destroy or
> fail to count votes for a particular candidate, there are risks
> inherent to
> electronic voting that do not exist in the same way with paper
> ballots. And
> although there are technical safeguards possible that seem like common
> sense, these safeguards continue to be ignored. Why?
>>
>> Will we ever see common sense safeguards added to the electronic
>> voting
> process?
>>
>> A search for known security vulnerabilities or potential flaws in
>> voting
> equipment manufactured and sold by Hart InterCivic turns up:
>>
>> http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?
>> channelid=31&contentid=1570
>>
>> Prior to casting my vote, I provided a written 'application' to vote
> containing my current address and other contact information. Election
> officials have every bit of information necessary to inform me in the
> event
> of a memory card failure or other malfunction that causes my
> electronic vote
> not to be counted properly.
>>
>> We know the very equipment that I just used to cast my vote has
> malfunctioned in the past. There have never been any reports that any
> voter
> has ever been allowed to revote following the loss of their electronic
> vote
> database record. Why not?
>>
>> I find it absurd that common sense solutions to electronic voting
>> problems
> are not being used. The vote I just cast could be made available for my
> anonymous review after it has been counted. For that matter, all votes
> made
> by all voters could be aggregated and published such that any voter
> could
> confirm that the vote that was counted was in fact the vote that they
> cast.
>>
>> Such a safeguard would ensure that no fraud could occur without timely
> detection by those voters who are directly affected, and no vote would
> go
> uncounted or be miscounted by mistake unless voters choose not to
> perform
> such data validation.
>>
>> If we're going to allow these electronic voting devices in our
>> elections,
> then we the people must be empowered to become the all volunteer
> quality
> assurance army that validates the data output.
>>
>> Reasonable people can live with the necessity to trust election
>> officials
> to be honest, and the criminal justice procedures to hold them
> accountable
> when they are not, but who are we supposed to hold accountable when
> equipment failures and flawed computer disaster recovery planning
> result in
> the secret exclusion of members of the public from access to their
> right to
> vote?
>>
>> If anyone has any further information about Hart InterCivic and the
> eSlate3000, please contact me directly.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Jason Coombs
>> jasoncscience.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>
>
/collin

Mobile Number 701.739.2492
Personal Address collinagmail.com
AIM blinkingspirit20
MSN myuu_20hotmail.com

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]