Re[2]: [ga] GA member for .org Task Force

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

Hello DPF,

Friday, August 03, 2001, 5:17:17 PM, DPF wrote:

> On Fri, 03 Aug 2001 23:14:15 +1200, Joop Teernstra
> <terastra@terabytz.co.nz> wrote:

>>The alternative is that voters express their preference on the list with a 
>>reserved [.org Task force election] subject marker  and that a volunteer 
>>does a manual count.
>>This will mean a loss of anonymity, but possible a higher voter turnout and 
>>an uncontestable result.

> Or we set up an e-mail address which goes to three scrutineers.  The
> three scrutineers all do independent counts and if they agree declare
> a result.

This would also satisfy the intent of the rules to provide an
audited result.  The ballot IDs could still be listed as they are
currently, and users can verify not only that their ballot was
counted, but that it was noted properly and not tampered with.  Also
the current method provides a list of the voters who participated,
which lets other members satisfy themselves that the votes were cast
by legitimate people.  This provides a transparency that not only
helps to prevent tampering, but actively discourages it.

That is the strong point to our current method, and any interim
solution should do its best to provide as much of that as possible in
order to maintain its legitimacy and stay within the spirit, if not
the exact letter, of our adopted voting rules.

-- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html