RE: RFP Evaluation Team NDA

["Delta" <delta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

What???

the only conversation I've had with Linda in the last six months was about
her new hairdo.

Just FYI.....
At the first committee meeting, it was *me* who brought up the fact that
there were organizations that were going to have relevant input....like CVV.
Marty (no doubt at the urging of Al and others) has been pushing for you
guys all along.....I don't disagree.

I'm not sure from your email what someone said I said....
but at least you thought to check with me rather than believe it out of
hand, eh?

You guys need to get it through your heads that I'm not the enemy. My goal
is a fair and honest election....just like you. I just have different
philosophies I use to implement that.
I also don't attribute the worst of motives to people who are really just
trying to do their jobs. They may make mistakes, but my goal is to fix the
mistakes, and see that they don't re-occur, not to make someone pay for it.

Bo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Pezzillo [mailto:jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 2:41 PM
> To: Delta; CVV Voting; Lpboulder
> Subject: Re: RFP Evaluation Team NDA
>
>
>
> Bo-
>
> Are you consulting for Linda Salas' re-election campaign?
>
> I just got a call back from one of Linda's campaign managers who told
> me you apparently took the time to set her straight on the "half-
> truths and misinformation" that "we" have been spreading, and letting
> her know the real story about how none of the problems in Boulder
> County elections are Linda's fault.
>
> Is that appropriate for an RFP evaluation committee member (or
> Libertarian) to be doing?
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 14, 2006, at 10:57 AM, Delta wrote:
>
> > Open Government is fine to a point......
> > Annoyance government is counter-productive.
> >
> > Again, if someone doesn't think *exactly* like you then they are
> > worthless,
> > eh, Joe?
> > If they don't do what *you* think they should do, then they are
> > sellouts?
> > Bite me.
> >
> > Read my email.....
> > I said PITAs will get very little co-operation......I didn't say they
> > shouldn't exist.
> > Stop putting YOUR words into MY mouth.
> > That sucks and I think that much less of you.
> >
> > Libertarian philosophy is NOT necessarily ACLU philosophy.....not
> > by a long
> > shot.
> > Get over it.
> >
> > *I'm* on the Committee because I want to see the right things
> > done....not
> > stir up everything for the hell of it and my own aggrandizement.
> > You're welcome to discuss issues and if they are relevant. I'll
> > bring them
> > up to the committee as a whole.
> > But being a PITA will make me that much less interested in what you
> > have to
> > say.....right or wrong.
> >
> > that's the way the world works.....
> >
> > Bo
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Joe Pezzillo [mailto:jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:11 AM
> >> To: CVV Voting
> >> Subject: Re: RFP Evaluation Team NDA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I think there's another corollary which is kiss up to the incompetent
> >> clerk's office too much and you lose all your credibility.
> >>
> >> Maybe he wanted to see it to see what the panel members signed away
> >> without uttering a peep.
> >>
> >> I would have thought that the Libertarians were as concerned about
> >> open governance as the ACLU, but I guess not.
> >>
> >> Seems like there no end to the "selling out" of the people going on
> >> in politics these days.
> >>
> >> I'll bet old King George found all the original American Patriots to
> >> be pains in the ass, too.
> >>
> >> Joe
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 14, 2006, at 3:51 AM, Delta wrote:
> >>
> >>> There is an axiom in public service/government:
> >>>
> >>> The bigger a pain in the ass you are....the less co-operation you
> >>> will get.
> >>> whether you're right or wrong.
> >>>
> >>> There's also a little corollary:
> >>> Rub elbows with PITAs and you will be considered a PITA, too.
> >>>
> >>> I think Neal is seeing ramifications from Crazy Al's actions....
> >>>
> >>> Of course, Neal isn't helping any....why is it necessary to see
> >>> these
> >>> non-disclosure documents? what the hell do they have to do with
> >>> choosing
> >>> election equipment????
> >>>
> >>> Not that I don't agree with the Open Meeting laws.....but I see
> >>> them abused
> >>> too many times.
> >>>
> >>> Like now.
> >>>
> >>> Everybody in CVV wants to have their two cents counted.....and for
> >>> what??
> >>> for crissakes, the county is only considering RENTING these things
> >>> for one
> >>> election.....and we have ONE choice.....how much affect could
> >>> ANYone have on
> >>> this decision??? And it's entirely temporary!! How much *more* will
> >>> you know
> >>> about this system if you use it once? and don't hand me that
> >>> conspiracy to
> >>> defraud the voter crap. EVERYONE involved wants a fair election.
> >>> It's just a
> >>> matter of what can make it easier without compromising integrity.
> >>>
> >>> If you people would give just a friggin iota...and let this process
> >>> continue
> >>> with *minimal* interference.....you could concentrate your
> >>> resources AND the
> >>> favors you curry....on the REAL DEAL.....when the County chooses a
> >>> system to
> >>> BUY.
> >>>
> >>> but, nooooo.......
> >>> Lets play like big shots and demand everything we can to show we
> >>> have
> >>> power.....because we can.
> >>> THAT's why democracy is a very bad form of government. (A quote
> >>> form the
> >>> great Roman Statesman, Seneca)
> >>>
> >>> Bo Shaffer
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Some Guy [mailto:someguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:34 AM
> >>>> To: CVV Voting
> >>>> Subject: RE: RFP Evaluation Team NDA
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm thinking that you could have asked one of the members of the
> >>>> committee
> >>>> what they had agreed to do or signed and they might have shown
> >>>> you. Showing
> >>>> you the agreement divulges nothing.
> >>>>
> >>>> Members of this list have signed this document.
> >>>>
> >>>> SG
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Joe Pezzillo [mailto:jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>>> Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:12 PM
> >>>> To: CVV Voting
> >>>> Subject: Re: RFP Evaluation Team NDA
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 10, 2006, at 10:51 PM, Neal McBurnett wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The team members also have already signed a confidentiality
> >>>>> agreement
> >>>>> of some sort.  (That will be modified now that they are using the
> >>>>> open
> >>>>> meetings procedures.)  I asked Liss for a copy, and he
> >>>>> suggested I'd
> >>>>> need to do an open records request for that.  Amazing - secrecy
> >>>>> about
> >>>>> the secrecy agreements!  It is so infectious it gets downright
> >>>>> silly
> >>>>> if you can retain your sense of humor.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I got your open records request right here:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>