HELP: Diebold defender attacking Bruce Funk on ZNet.

[JimDandy]

Bruce Funk has been posting on the ZNet forum in response to a Diebold defender. He is willing to answer any questions over there that you may have.

http://www.zdnet.com/5208-10532-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=19386&messageID=374676&start=-21

JD

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

1. VoteTrustUSA will be coming to the rescue Monday

We will have him covered.

Meanwhile, I went to the thread, posted, and also followed the links
to Utah Counts Votes, and emailed the gov and the county commissioners.

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Dear Governor Jon Huntsman:

I am writing to you from North Carolina, where we had our own drama with
Diebold.

The entire country is watching Utah, to see how you handle the revelation that
Diebold has sent you systems that failed their own and others' inspection.

The Votin Machine Industry is known for its corruption, but Diebold is noted to
be the most aggregious of offenders.

Diebold so dislikes following the rules, and in states that have criminal penalties tied to those rules,
Diebold won't do business there.

Like in North Carolina. Diebold won't sell voting machines here.

Diebold abandoned any attempts to do business in North Carolina on December 22, 2005.
They offered their help to our legislators to change the law so that they could do business
here. But they fled.

Diebold can't even sell voting machines in a state where they manufacture them!
The touchscreen is made in Lexington, North Carolina.

ES&S remained, bid on the business, and is the only vendor selling machines in our state right now.

So, Bruce Funk found that some of the voting machines had the yellow dots on them,
an indicator that these machines failed quality control. Good!

The voting machine company is not going to be honest with you -
Diebold was decertified by California for lying to the secretary of state!

They are afraid to swear in North Carolina that the source code in escrow is the same as on
the machines!

The one NC county that had Diebold was eaten up in tech support expenditures, about $85K a year
for a populace of about 100K voters. Then, the machines failed to upload about 13,000 votes.

slick sales pitch and failures in Gaston Co NC
http://www.ncvoter.net/diebold.html
lawsuits and news
http://www.ncvoter.net/dieboldnews.html
source code and operating system
http://www.ncvoter.net/dieboldcode.html

See the statute of our law that scared Diebold the most:

SECTION 2.(a) Part 2 of Article 14A of Chapter 163 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to read:

"§ 163-165.9A. Voting systems: requirements for voting systems vendors; penalties.

(a) Duties of Vendor. – Every vendor that has a contract to provide a voting system in North Carolina shall do all of the following:

(1) The vendor shall place in escrow with an independent escrow agent approved by the State Board of Elections all software that is relevant to functionality, setup, configuration, and operation of the voting system, including, but not limited to, a complete copy of the source and executable code, build scripts, object libraries, application program interfaces, and complete documentation of all aspects of the system including, but not limited to, compiling instructions, design documentation, technical documentation, user documentation, hardware and software specifications, drawings, records, and data. The State Board of Elections may require in its request for proposal that additional items be escrowed, and if any vendor that agrees in a contract to escrow additional items, those items shall be subject to the provisions of this section. The documentation shall include a list of programmers responsible for creating the software and a sworn affidavit that the source code includes all relevant program statements in low-level and high-level languages.

(2) The vendor shall notify the State Board of Elections of any change in any item required to be escrowed by subdivision (1) of this subsection.

(3) The chief executive officer of the vendor shall sign a sworn affidavit that the source code and other material in escrow is the same being used in its voting systems in this State. The chief executive officer shall ensure that the statement is true on a continuing basis.

(4) The vendor shall promptly notify the State Board of Elections and the county board of elections of any county using its voting system of any decertification of the same system in any state, of any defect in the same system known to have occurred anywhere, and of any relevant defect known to have occurred in similar systems.

(5) The vendor shall maintain an office in North Carolina with staff to service the contract.

(b) Penalties. – Willful violation of any of the duties in subsection (a) of this section is a Class G felony. Substitution of source code into an operating voting system without notification as provided by subdivision (a)(2) of this section is a Class I felony. In addition to any other applicable penalties, violations of this section are subject to a civil penalty to be assessed by the State Board of Elections in its discretion in an amount of up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per violation. A civil penalty assessed under this section shall be subject to the provisions of G.S. 163-278.34(e)."

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2005/Bills/Senate/HTML/S223v7.html

[JimDandy]

2. That's good news! Bruce is certainly deserving of support.

I cheered from afar as all of that drama unfolded for you in NC. Thanks for all your help. I'll check in tomorrow -- got to hit the sheets now, for a few hours.
JD