RE: More reasons to avoid electronic voting!

["Some Guy" <someguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ralph (et al),

Despite your difference of opinion with Mr. Shaffer and desire to have the
LPCO denounce the elections system in Boulder (for which they care little) -
why would you want to ask for the state party to denounce Mr. Shaffer
himself?
They wouldn't do it; you know they wouldn't do that, but you insist on
making such statements anyway.
I only bother to reply in public because Bo was asked to become involved. He
didn't seek this position. Rather than get any support from you or anyone
here, he got a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

If people have different opinions than you do, is it correct and proper for
you to call them idiots in a public forum? Well of course you can speak
freely, but you're not going to be able to make positive changes if you rip
people's heads off and defecate down their necks.

You didn't vote for Bo so obviously he doesn't speak for you. But you also
didn't vote for anyone else. When the polls were open you weren't anywhere
to be found. You could easily be on the board of the LP and speak on behalf
of the party. You've chosen to speak just for Ralph. We're all fine with
that.
You've heard me yap about non-voters who whine incessantly about their
elected leaders, but refuse to participate? You're participating in a number
of ways, one of which is to whine about things that you could have had a say
in, but declined.

Bo's got an opinion. It isn't yours. It's not mine either (in this case). So
why am I not using Bo as my personal toilet? I can easily lambaste him here
for his opinions and often do, but I don't go running to mommy and ask her
to write a note siding with me over him.

SG

-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph Shnelvar [mailto:ralphs@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:32 AM
To: cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: lpboulder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; lpco-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: More reasons to avoid electronic voting!

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:43:36 -0700, you wrote:

>The concern over the first story is ridiculous.
>go read about X-10.
>Info tx along power lines is old technology. Been around for decades.
>It will not open up computers to hacking anymore than they are exposed to
it
>on Broadband or DSL.
>and, those machines under consideration around *here* have no internet
>access capability anyway, regardless of how you intend to transmit it.
>
>The second story is nothing new either.....
>silicon Valley Geeks have been making back doors and spyware ever since
>software was invented.
>how are *they* stopped from putting trapdoors into software meant for
>electronic voting???

The fact that you understand the second point and yet cannot follow through
to understand that electronic voting machines should not come anywhere near
the vote counting process is truly depressing.

"Hey, that's just the way it is and has been for a while," is precisely what
we're trying to correct.

Nonetheless, it is consistent with your illogical position that the
Libertarian State Party is bound by rules (no endorsement of non-Libertarian
candidates) that state-authorized affiliates are not bound by.

[Although Mr. Shaffer is the official voice of the Libertarian Party in
Boulder County, he does not speak for me.  Indeed, I ask the State Board to
issue a public statement in support of hand-counted paper ballots and to
denounce Mr. Shaffer's endorsement of the lease of the Hart Intercivic
machinery in Boulder County.]

Ralph Shnelvar
Who holds no official position in the Libertarian Party