Re: recounts in Colorado (under present law) -- The definition of insanity

["LPBC Chairman" <chairman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

So you think it's OK to re-install an antiquated and illegal system
*temporarily*.....?
For what, a week....a month....a few years?
It's OK to have a flawed system, as long as it's temporary......
(Isn't that what we have *now*???)

and *I* look stupid???

Sigh.....
Maybe you should listen to your *own* advice just a wee bit......;-)

Bo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Evan Daniel Ravitz" <evan@xxxxxxxx>
To: "LPBC Chairman" <chairman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Paul Tiger" <Paul.Tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "BCV" <bcv@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
"William Crook" <slayer@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: recounts in Colorado (under present law) -- The definition of
insanity


>
> Bo, if you'd actually read what I've said at least twice in this
> forum, I favor hand-counting as a temporary measure until a computer
> system can be made to satisfy techies and voters. ALL the software
> which has counted votes since the '70s IS secret.
>
> I'm not a luddite. I started programming computers in 1968 and did it
> professionally until 1983. Calling people names who you don't know and
> don't even read just makes you look stupid.
>
> Evan
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> Evan Ravitz     303 440 6838     evan@xxxxxxxx
> Vote for the National Initiative! www.vote.org
> Photo Adventures:          www.vote.org/photos
>
> Kucinich: the ONLY candidate to vote against the
> "Patriot" Act and the Iraq war:  www.kucinich.us
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, LPBC Chairman wrote:
>
> > Evan,
> > Errors are errors.
> > Secret ones and conspiracies and all are a bit paranoid.
> > Stop being a Luddite.
> > Technology can give us the ability to be error free as well as fraud
proof..
> > We have to mold it to our purposes, not let it take over our process.
> > This *is* possible.
> > Just because something has been done for a long time is not a good
reason to
> > continue it. In fact, it's probably a good reason to *not* continue it.
This
> > is a dynamic world we live in and everything has to adapt. To not change
is
> > to stagnate and die.
> >
> > Bo
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Evan Daniel Ravitz" <evan@xxxxxxxx>
> > To: "LPBC Chairman" <chairman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Paul Tiger" <Paul.Tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "BCV" <bcv@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
> > "William Crook" <slayer@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 9:25 AM
> > Subject: Re: recounts in Colorado (under present law) -- The definition
of
> > insanity
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Bo, Canada (20-something million people) and Britain both hand-count
> > > ballots. It's been done for hundreds of years. The journey of 1000
> > > miles begins with a single step, counting a million starts with one.
> > > It's "scalable". I'm sure it's more error prone than computer
> > > counting, but with the proper measures, those are honest errors
> > > instead of secret ones which can never be discovered now.
> > >
> > > Evan
> > >
> > > On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, LPBC Chairman wrote:
> > >
> > > > Evan....
> > > >
> > > > Hand counting???
> > > > a hundred thousand ballots???
> > > > (in Boulder County alone....)
> > > > And you think *that* would be more accurate???
> > > > Maybe someday you should volunteer at the Clerks office and see what
it
> > > > takes to just open and sort ballots by hand......let alone count
them.
> > You
> > > > would be amazed at the errors people make.
> > > >
> > > > We need to come up with a way to make technology work.
> > > >
> > > > Bo
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Paul Tiger" <tigerp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: "Evan Daniel Ravitz" <evan@xxxxxxxx>; <paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: "BCV" <bcv@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "William Crook" <slayer@xxxxxxxxx>; "Bo
> > > > Shaffer" <bo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 6:46 PM
> > > > Subject: RE: recounts in Colorado (under present law) -- The
definition
> > of
> > > > insanity
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > No, Ben Franklin actually. Go do your homework.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Evan Daniel Ravitz [mailto:evan@xxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 1:18 PM
> > > > > To: paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Cc: BCV; William Crook; Bo Shaffer
> > > > > Subject: Re: recounts in Colorado (under present law) -- The
> > definition of
> > > > > insanity
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Paul Tiger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and
over
> > and
> > > > > > expecting different results." -- Benjamin Franklin
> > > > >
> > > > > Einstein, actually. State law mandates recounts by the same method
as
> > > > > the original count. That's why I support hand-counting until the
State
> > > > > law is changed; public-source software isn't as good as
hand-counting,
> > > > > but much better than secret software used over and over.
> > > > >
> > > > > Evan
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------------------------------------
> > > > > Evan Ravitz     303 440 6838     evan@xxxxxxxx
> > > > > Vote for the National Initiative! www.vote.org
> > > > > Photo Adventures:          www.vote.org/photos
> > > > >
> > > > > Kucinich: the ONLY candidate to vote against the
> > > > > "Patriot" Act and the Iraq war:  www.kucinich.us
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>