Re: Secret votes HOWTO
>>"Raul" == Raul Miller <email@example.com> writes:
Raul> On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 02:10:49PM -0700, lantz moore wrote:
>> sure, the ballot is signed, however, the "password" can be anything the
>> person wants, including their own name/email or someone else's name/email.
>> i was just pointing out that if someone does use someone else's name/email
>> as their password, temporary confusion will ensue.
Raul> I'm not sure this problem is worth solving.
It is simple enough. If the passowrd string is missing, then
the advertised default could be to put the gpg id as the password.
The user supplied string is not allowed to have a `@` char..
In this case, would we still need the hash?
The seq number disambiguates the user provided string. The
names of all who voted shall be presented in alphabetical order.
What's the objection to this proposal? (we can randomize how
the sequence number alloted is related to the alphabetical order of
voter or the order in which mail was received)
"Americans like to talk about (or be told about) Democracy but, when
put to the test, usually find it to be an 'inconvenience.' We have
opted instead for an authoritarian system *disguised* as a Democracy.
We pay through the nose for an enormous joke-of-a-government, let it
push us around, and then wonder how all those assholes got in there."
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C