From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs)
Subject: University Researchers Challenge Bush Win In Florida

Paul,

In the case in point, even with the variables you mention, the entire technical problem can be reduced to observing how the election officials in various places have historically constructed ballots and influence just those that can be influenced in just those states where it will matter. The Republican party (my party) apparently has advantages over others when it comes to influencing the technical details of the design of voting machines. Diebold, for example.

It makes just about as much sense for every regional election office to do their ballot construction differently as it does for everyone to create their own home grown crypto.

Your point about differences in ballot construction is also a red herring to begin with. If you think that there is the same degree of variability with ballots in electronic voting machines as there is with legacy ballots, then perhaps you are the one who does not know how the process really works with the machines in question.

> Jason, you really need to think
> before posting.  You're beginning
> to look silly.

I don't know how to think, Paul. But I have sincerely appreciated all of your attempts to teach me how.

You really need to stop making things seem so complicated that the difficulty of influencing their behavior or outcome couldn't possibly be surmounted.

Speaking of thinking before posting, you type more words on mailing list postings every day than I have original thoughts... How do you do it and get work done or live life, too?

Is Texas really *so* dismal a place that there is nothing better to do?

No wonder the Bushes leave for nicer parts as soon as they can.

Regards,

Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists