EVMs - Not gone away you know

SPN on P.ie wrote:

I spent a lot of time trying to explain to the media that the PR Spin
they were hearing from Government was complete balderdash - and a lot
of time trying to explain it to Opposition TDs.

They didn't believe it.

The general concensus was that the DOEHLG couldn't have got it THAT wrong.

They did get it wrong.

The NEDAP machines - now pay ettention here FT - DO NOT WORK PROPERLY!

Anybody with any technical savvy will know this by simply reading
the technical specs, and reviewing the results of the "tests" that were
"performed" on them.

Anybody else can read the report of the Commission on Electronic Voting, whose experts gutted the system.

The bit I don't understand is why no journalist has ever followed
the money trail - these machines sell for €833 in Amsterdam. The DOEHLG
paid €4,500 per machine!

Who trousered the additional €21 million?

Why was the Purchase Contract signed AFTER all the problems had been
brought to the attention of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on DOEHLG?

Why was the Contract amended to include a clause that the money would be payable EVEN if the machines didn't work?

Why was the CEV not set up to examine the machines until AFTER they were paid for?

This thing stinks to the heavens!

This is the real reason I have lost faith in JG.

Because...?

Green TD in Tribunal shock

Someone'll follow the money trail. Worked for Nixon..

(€4500 for 4 EEPROMS, a touch-screen, a USB jack and a cable binding them together .. . )

Auditor #9 wrote:

Green TD in Tribunal shock

Someone'll follow the money trail. Worked for Nixon..

(€4500 for 4 EEPROMS, a touch-screen, a USB jack and a cable binding them together .. . )

That seems rather unlikely....what with them having been bought by his predecessor and all that.

I was just about to come back and edit my post ...

still, is this a dirty little scandal that the minister has rotting under his desk?

€21 million is 12 MW of good clean wind energy - about 8000 homes.

What are you on about.

ibis wrote:

Because...?

ibis, you are getting on my nerves.

Because what ?

I posted a quote, quite clear, and concluded it was a reason to lose faith.

Yet, that quote and my conclusion are not all of the evidence.

I also have the letter.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

ibis wrote:

Because...?

ibis, you are getting on my nerves.

Because what ?

I posted a quote, quite clear, and concluded it was a reason to lose faith.

Yet, that quote and my conclusion are not all of the evidence.

I also have the letter.

Apologies - I genuinely didn't find it all clear. Everything in SPN's post is in reference to the purchase of the e-voting systems, yes? Does John Gormley have a plan to resurrect them?

I'm not trying to try your patience, and I'm not trying to defend anyone - I'm just honestly curious as to why the purchase of e-voting machines by John Gormley's predecessor has caused you to lose faith in John Gormley. Nothing you've posted tells me why that is, and I voted for the man, so I'm interested. Please don't kill me.

Oh, because I wrote to him immediately after he was appointed Minister, I tell a lie, I wrote to Sargent who passed it on.

In fairness to Green Party bureacracy?, the letter was attended to within 4 weeks. The essence of the reply was however horrid.

SO: I firmly believed on the 24th May 2007, that if I voted Green, I was voting for the PERMANENT removal of EV from this country.

But Nahhh....

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Oh, because I wrote to him immediately after he was appointed Minister, I tell a lie, I wrote to Sargent who passed it on.

In fairness to Green Party bureacracy?, the letter was attended to within 4 weeks. The essence of the reply was however horrid.

SO: I firmly believed on the 24th May 2007, that if I voted Green, I was voting for the PERMANENT removal of EV from this country.

But Nahhh....

Ah, now I understand. Gormley was always a fan of e-voting, though.

I wouldn't necessarily have guessed that you'd written to Gormley, or voted (partly?) on that basis, you know!

Oh bother.

No, of course.

I'll straighten this out tomorrow.

Jesus I thought there was going to be a fight there for a second lads. Pity, anything for a bit of excitement this time of night. Poor John Gormley.

EVM those links open in new tabs you know.

Thanks for the info EVM, I didn't know any of that.

I'm not too surprised that Mr. Gormley wants electronic voting, it's the only hope he's got to ever get elected again, provided someone creatively programs the machines.

Isn't there another scandal to be followed regarding the huge cost of storing these machines? And isn't it the friend of a friend who owns the storage facility (if you get my drift)?

Lots of follow the money possibilities on this one.

Hermes wrote:

Thanks for the info EVM, I didn't know any of that.

I'm not too surprised that Mr. Gormley wants electronic voting, it's the only hope he's got to ever get elected again, provided someone creatively programs the machines.

Sigh. I was rather hoping to avoid this kind of nonsense here. I voted for Gormley, and on his record so far, I see no reason not to do so again. Little nodding emoticons won't be making much difference.

Hermes wrote:

Isn't there another scandal to be followed regarding the huge cost of storing these machines? And isn't it the friend of a friend who owns the storage facility (if you get my drift)?

Lots of follow the money possibilities on this one.

The friend of a friend of John Gormley?

I'm not sure this thread will survive here actually. I was mischievous last night, EVM had one too many and Hermes, I was glad John Gormley got elected and I hope he will get elected again, EVMs or not. If he's going to fall foul of the corruptive influence of power then here we will be the first to watch him - but not now, this site is too young - some people aren't even stem cells yet !

I've my finger on the LOCK button...

ibis wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

ibis wrote:

Because...?

ibis, you are getting on my nerves.

Because what ?

I posted a quote, quite clear, and concluded it was a reason to lose faith.

Yet, that quote and my conclusion are not all of the evidence.

I also have the letter.

Apologies - I genuinely didn't find it all clear. Everything in SPN's post is in reference to the purchase of the e-voting systems, yes? Does John Gormley have a plan to resurrect them?

I'm not trying to try your patience, and I'm not trying to defend anyone - I'm just honestly curious as to why the purchase of e-voting machines by John Gormley's predecessor has caused you to lose faith in John Gormley. Nothing you've posted tells me why that is, and I voted for the man, so I'm interested. Please don't kill me.

And my apologies to you for being both unclear and belligerent. I won't kill you .... this time.

My point was that I voted Green having given considerable weight to the belief that GP were in favour of overturning this nonsense. I don't think I ever thought for even a second that the GP would end up in Gov., but then one usually votes according to conscience.

Clearly I don't apportion blame to the GP for initiating this affair. However, in my book, the only thing worse than a person who buys a dead horse is the person who continues to flog it.

JG has not decided to resurrect yet, I think he is on a wait and see. But there are two Commission reports out there to see, so why the wait. The meter is still running on this one.

Anyway, now that the Silly Auld Pencil man is going, I am hoping for a new day on this.

And I appreciate that my opinions are entirely subjective.

The only way this thread will survive now is if it turns into a debate on whether or not evotingmachines should or can be used and I think like Gormley they should and can. Why not? We have enough programmers around this place to know that the code is simple and could be published and besides that that the procedures around the machines should be executed to the satisfaction of all, especially Akrasia.

It's not the machines it's the people who are at fault. Free the Gormanstown ..

Auditor #9 wrote:

The only way this thread will survive now is if it turns into a debate on whether or not evotingmachines should or can be used and I think like Gormley they should and can. Why not? We have enough programmers around this place to know that the code is simple and could be published and besides that that the procedures around the machines should be executed to the satisfaction of all, especially Akrasia.

It's not the machines it's the people who are at fault. Free the Gormanstown ..

Hmm. I oppose voting machines on several bases, though. Those actually purchased suffer from the many flaws already observed - and like every IT person, I don't trust them at all. Voting machines without a paper trail are completely unacceptable, because there is no way of checking that their record is accurate.

Finally, I would object to even a perfect voting machine purely on the basis of loss of drama.

ibis wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

The only way this thread will survive now is if it turns into a debate on whether or not evotingmachines should or can be used and I think like Gormley they should and can. Why not? We have enough programmers around this place to know that the code is simple and could be published and besides that that the procedures around the machines should be executed to the satisfaction of all, especially Akrasia.

It's not the machines it's the people who are at fault. Free the Gormanstown ..

Hmm. I oppose voting machines on several bases, though. Those actually purchased suffer from the many flaws already observed - and like every IT person, I don't trust them at all. Voting machines without a paper trail are completely unacceptable, because there is no way of checking that their record is accurate.

Finally, I would object to even a perfect voting machine purely on the basis of loss of drama.

Yes, and may I add total absence of purpose or necessity.

Interesting questions could arise with this. I doubt you are in doubt ibis that a perfect machine could be built - we can assemble one between the three of us here if you like. Now, who would build it for any government and who would create the procedures around it and who would watch them and so on. Didn't South Africa have evoting and wasn't it a success?

You kinda had me on the drama aspect and it could be argued by me that a small country like Ireland would be better off with pencil voting and that e-voting would better be used in larger countries but I think it's only a matter of time...

Audi, just because something is inevitable does not make it justified.

I have yet to encounter ONE good justification for ev in Ireland.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Audi, just because something is inevitable does not make it justified.

I have yet to encounter ONE good justification for ev in Ireland.

The only justification I've ever been able to come up with is that the results might be easier to obtain afterwards...but the only thing that stops them being available now is the usual complete lack of vision/organisation.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Audi, just because something is inevitable does not make it justified.

I have yet to encounter ONE good justification for ev in Ireland.

I see your point and am inclined to agree with it - sometimes a low tech solution is best. However, can't you see room for growth and expansion of the idea if it got off the ground at all? It has to begin somewhere and could end up with people mobile-phone or tv voting on a local council budget. Do you think that's crazy? If you look at the long term then that's what could be the picture. Saying it's not justified could be like saying that piping water is not justified - why go to all that trouble when we have wells and enough falls from the sky? I think if you believe in democracy then a logical conclusion is not just evoting but more voting and that should be made more and more transparent and easier and easier.

But at the moment no, you're both right it's not justified which is why I think it brings up interesting questions of a fundamental democratic nature about how democracy itself can/should/will go forward..

I don't think that's crazy at all.
If voter turnout increased to say 75% because of secure verifiable mobile phone based/web based voting then yes, bring it on. The justification here being a significant benefit to democracy.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

I don't think that's crazy at all.
If voter turnout increased to say 75% because of secure verifiable mobile phone based/web based voting then yes, bring it on. The justification here being a significant benefit to democracy.

Don't you think this above is possible? i.e. that it would increase turnout? In some way it could even appear on mobile phones though I don't know. Wouldn't it appeal to the rock the voter age group? Not necessarily but even this: isn't it more representative of a voter category if not the Era we exist in? Wouldn't that be justification enough?

Are you feeling a bit better about yourself yet?

ibis wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Thanks for the info EVM, I didn't know any of that.

I'm not too surprised that Mr. Gormley wants electronic voting, it's the only hope he's got to ever get elected again, provided someone creatively programs the machines.

Sigh. I was rather hoping to avoid this kind of nonsense here. I voted for Gormley, and on his record so far, I see no reason not to do so again. Little nodding emoticons won't be making much difference.

Hermes wrote:

Isn't there another scandal to be followed regarding the huge cost of storing these machines? And isn't it the friend of a friend who owns the storage facility (if you get my drift)?

Lots of follow the money possibilities on this one.

The friend of a friend of John Gormley?

Nonsense? Because I disagree with you? What a sheltered existence you must lead.

As for the use of emoticons: I used this to temper my remark, to show that it was overstated and meant to be taken lightly. If you don't like emoticons I suggest you start a campaign here to discontinue their use. Don't moan to me; I don't care.

And for the record, since it seems to matter: I'm not in the least impressed with Mr. Gormley and his alleged performance.

Regarding your last question, that asked if I was referring to Mr. Gormley: No. The friend of a friend of Martin Cullen (the minister responsible for the machines). The contract to store many of these machines was awarded to a company in Mr. Cullen's own constituency. The cost to store these machines was something close to five times what it woud have cost anywhere else. Here's a quote from the Waterford News & Star, that explains why this contract was awarded:

“The requirements for the winning tender outlined by the Waterford returning officer included insulation in the roof, walls and floors, two technical offices, universal access, car parking, a shower and a central location near Waterford courthouse.”

http://archives.tcm.ie/waterfordnews/2005/02/18/story17097.asp