Don’t be pained, I’m neither hurt nor angry nor crying in a corner. Because I’ve spent some time in academia, some people assume that I have no idea how the real world works. Or they assume that I would use the exact same approach when writing a cryptography PhD dissertation and when educating the public about interesting new technology. You’re not the first.

I do find it interesting that you continually associate “well-educated” with “impractical.” Sadly, it has become a common trait among activists, and not just in the voting world. There seems to be disdain for education. Certainly, there is always a risk that too much theory will impede practice. But to assume that theory, reasoning, and intellectual debate are inherently bad…. that’s reminiscent of the current US administration, only with a different evidence-free ideology.

In 1954, Thurgood Marshall, then the Chief Counsel for the NAACP, argued before the Supreme Court in the case of Brown v Board of Education. The NAACP won. Following that win, Thurgood Marshall, like many other well-educated people of the time, thought that the states would just integrate their schools.

A few years later, nine black students were selected to attend the 1957-58 school year at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas. The Governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus, called out the Arkansas National Guard. The rest, as they say, is history.

The point of this little story? “Political power flows from the barrel of a gun.”

You can call me misinformed all you like. But the attitude you’re expressing reminds me a little of Thurgood Marshall’s astonishment.

Real election systems–not ivory tower conceptualizations–but real working election systems channel real political power.

It’s probably impolitic for me to say this: I read your thesis. You put a lot of work into it. I expect you put a lot of heart into it. So, it pains me to tell you that I don’t think you’re working towards a politically practicable solution. I don’t know about you, but if someone told me that, I might be hurt or I might get mad. Maybe a little of both. So, you have my apologies.

Aw fuckk it, you arent’ going to pay any attention anyhow.

In particular, you mention the problem of election failure, which is crucial. Interestingly, that’s one major area where open-audit systems shine. If you hand-count ballots, but you lose a ballot box (e.g. 2002, San Francisco, ballot boxes floating in the Bay), then what? Election officials will tell you that mistakes and problems happen all the time, and the biggest problem is that you can’t recover from them, you can barely even detect the problems. As a result, election officials typically hope for a clear, unambiguous winner (no matter what the party), so that no one needs to look too closely at their voting operations.

With open-audit voting, a failure is actually something you can investigate and often recover from. A voter who checks that their ballot made it into the tally using their tracking number can detect if their vote isn’t counted and complain, with court-acceptable proof (a digital signature, which has legal precedent.) An election official can tell if votes were handled incorrectly. And everyone can verify the tally process and provide clear evidence if an error occurs.

So, instead of the contrived three options you present, there’s at least one more option: build a voting system that can recover from failure. That’s what a few of us are trying to do.

If you have an election failure, then there are three basic choices:

* Demonstrate or riot.
* Convince lawyers and judges that there’s been an election failure.
* Do nothing.

The activists know about the police tactics used at during N30 (Seattle), FTAA (Miami), RNC (New York) and elsewhere.

Further, the lawyers and judges will refuse to understand the mathematics. See Sarasota.

Therefore, you seem to be advocating “do nothing” as the response to an election failure.

I know you’re pretty smart. Don’t assume that everyone else around you is as stupid as a pile of rocks. Try to understand other people’s perspectives here. M’Kay?