RE: [ga] Re: Proposal for list rules/actions

[Patrick Greenwell <patrick@stealthgeeks.net>]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, William X. Walsh wrote:

> > Requiring a voters home address helps to avoid a situation where one
> > individual claims to be numerous individuals and that the single address
> > for all these individuals is a business address. A dedicated fraud may be
> > successful claim to be 3 or 4 people, but they aren't going to be able to
> > effectively claim to be 95,000. 
> 
> "Home addresses" can be manufactured just as easily as email addresses.

Not really. I can go sign up for a virtually unlimited number of free
email accounts right now, sitting at my computer at 1 am. While I might be
able to scrounge up a few, I lack the ability to "manufacture" an
unlimited number of free "home addresses" that I could receive mail at.
If you possess such an ability, please explain it to me. Further, using
addresses other than ones home address, an address that is not your own 
requires some effort in retreiving the mail. 

To reiterate I do not believe that the potential for some level of fraud
can be completely eliminated from this process, nor do I offer this
proposal as an all-encompassing means of doing so. What the proposal will
do is provide an extremely cost-effective, low-overhead means of raising 
the bar, hopefully discouraging those thinking of engaging in such
activity, while making it much more costly, time-consuming, and
removing the automatic 100% chance of success the "committed fraud"
currently enjoys. It is important to note that I offer such
recommendations as a starting point of an iterative process, not
one that it is intended to be complete and comprehensive from day 1.

It's easy to criticize. It's much more difficult to do so constructively. 
If you would like to present a better idea that has the potential for
the same or similar degree of success at an administrative cost inline
with the proposal I've made, and one which is as easy for the "voter" as
this one is, I'm all ears. 

Or would you prefer that we continue on the present non-course, where not
even an attempt at a mechanism has been made in large part because critics
express their extreme displeasure with any proposal that does not offer an
absolute or near-absolute prevention of fraud? 

Haven't you suffered long enough without any sort of meaningful voice in
the decisions that may affect you? 

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
                               Patrick Greenwell                          
                       Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/