Re: [board] Re: What is Boulder County trying to hide?

[Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mr. Tiger:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:36:15 -0600, you wrote:

>Oh bother - what silliness this all is. I'd imagine that all the people
>listed in these diatribes have better things to do with their time than
>participate in this.

I am participating in this ad nauseum because the people in CVV and
elsewhere should know what they are up against.

>
>Jerry Van Sickle was selected to be the representative of the LPBC at the
>test.

I have problems with that.  See, below.

>Jerry is a wonderful Libertarian;

Absolutely true,

>studious person;

Absolutely true.

>and great educator.

Absolutely true.

>He's been a candidate and of service to the community for decades.

Absolutely true.

>Only one person from each party was needed.

It depends on what your definition of "needed" is.  This may seem a minor
point but it is not and I will expand on it, below.

>I am a board member of the LPBC,
>discussed the possibilities with Bo and he selected Jerry. Jerry was willing
>to participate in a manner conducive to the process and you were not.

It clearly depends on what process you are talking about.  More, below.

>End of story.

Hardly.



Now for the background.

Jerry Van Sickle is easily one of the most trustworthy, charming, and
intelligent men I know.  He is a fine and very good human being and a
trusted friend of mine.

Jerry is also untrained in
	computer skills
	systems analysis
	the law regarding the election process
	election procedures

In other words, dear Jerry was legally qualified to be an observer but he
was unqualified to pursue any irregularities in the system that he was
purportedly observing.

Mr. Tiger and Mr. Shaffer deliberately selected a man who - even with
superhuman efforts - would not have been able to protect the Libertarian
Party from the use of uncertified or defective machinery.  Jerry did not
know what to look for any more than I would know how to look for a defective
gall bladder.


Thus the question is: What was the "process"?  Is it merely to go along with
the Clerk's office and witness the pre-arranged test that the Clerk wished
to have done?  Or was it to have someone competent to judge and criticize?

It depends on your definition of "needed."  In fact, zero observers were
needed if all that was to be accomplished was to "go along."  At the first
test there were exactly zero Libertarians representing the Libertarian Party
because the Libertarian observer was the Clerk's Chief Deputy, Nancy Jo
Wurl.  Nancy also happens to be a Democrat.

But if your definition of "needed" is the number of people who have their
eyes open for irregular ties then the more the merrier.  Al is great but he
is only a single human being.