[ale] Its over. Maybe

[Jim Popovitch]

On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 20:17 -0500, David Corbin wrote:
> >
> > Many people (entities too) have looked at Diebold.  
> 
> And most if not all that have looked at Diebold have said it shouldn't be used 
> without serious changes.

I find that hard to believe.   Are you sure that it isn't most if not
all, of those that you believe, have said that it shouldn't be used
without serious changes?  I would think that if everyone said it
shouldn't be used we would have heard more about this in the mainstream
circles, day after day.  

I do know that there has been a lot of criticism, esp from the OSS
crowds, but a lot of that has ulterior motives (i.e. "I want to see the
source code before I trust it").  Last I heard a few, what seemed at the
time respectable, people and groups seemed to validate the latest
Diebold design.

Again, I am not an authority on this issue, as I haven't studied it day
in and day out.  I can say though that, based on my experience
yesterday, the process appears better than paper ballots.

-Jim P.