On 12/31/05, Peter Crowther Peter@ozzard.org wrote:
<shrug>. And? A system is a system is a system.
I've CC'ed Cees into this. Cees, what's SqP written in and how easy is it (in your experience) to change?
In, err, <cough>, C. The data is in XML, and I have Squeak code to read it so anything that would just use the data for checking 'standing' in SqP could be done in 100% Squeak (I also have "Terminus", a web service, XML/RPC IIRC, that lets you query SqP).
However, now that we're talking about using SqP for elections stuff, my two cents:
KISS.
Claimer: I have lots of experience with organizing and running elections. From real-world municipal elections, to Fidonet factions, Usenet stuff, to open source community stuff. As I said in private mail to you guys, I don't want to meddle around too much with how the Election team operates because formally it should be distinct from the Board and chances are high that i'll find myself being a candidate on a coming election. Having said that...
There are, IMNSHO, two ways to make elections fair: make them extremely transparent, or use technology. It seems that the elections team is mostly discussing the second thing (tell it if I'm wrong, I skimmed the archives but can have gotten a wrong impression from there). What about the first? (and "both", I think, is not a valid answer - election technology often makes everything more complex and therefore almost by definition less transparent).
For example, if an election must be held, setup a website. People see a form, where they can a) fill in their email address, and b) fill in their vote (one or more candidates). And maybe one of these funny images to check they're human :-). In response, the website generates a confirmation mail, with a security hash and the vote. User clicks, vote is registered. At the end of the election, the website automagically stops accepting new votes but displays a list of all email addresses used to vote on the election page instead (and maybe pings squeak-dev to tell everyone the list is up). We have a pretty good grasp of the set of email addresses that form the community. If we suddenly see a whole lot of "strange" mail addresses popping up, something's fishy. If, say, 10% of the voters say the thing is fishy, the election is made invalid. If they don't, the website displays the election results a week later (and probably sends the results to squeak-dev). With the web tools available one could whip up such a system in less than a day.
If every election we hold is canceled because of abuse, that is maybe a time to start thinking about requiring people to register on SqP, or whatever. But until that time, I'd say - keep it as simple as open as possible. Let the community be defined by those who think they're part of the community instead of some artificial social system. I've heard lots of discussions and fears especially during Jini community meetings about the open system, but every vote held since then was ok. No large companies rigging the election by telling all their employees to vote, or something :)
Just my opinion - due to my position I'm not going to defend it or something (at best clarify if I was unclear somewhere - just ask). If SqP will be used, fine. I'm available to help on the work that would be necessary in either case.
Hth,
Cees