Re: Will a vote for John Kerry be counted by a Hart InterCivic eSlate3000 in Honolulu?

[Collin <myuu () pojo com>]

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" <jasonc () science org>
> To: <Full-disclosure () netsys com>
> Cc: <info () hartic 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
> > jasonc () science 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        collina () gmail com
AIM                             blinkingspirit20
MSN                             myuu_20 () hotmail com

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