Chuck, > And Putnam indicated indifference in his support of eVote. Gosh, I thought he was one of my major supporters. I guess I'm in trouble. > energies more effectively? This effort will loose immensely if we > fail to win your monumental talents into at least some form of > marginal endorsement of these efforts. This isn't fair. Well, it looks like a square ball to me. And I've spent so much of my life making a round one. I'm sorry if I got the id wrong. I was trying to support your work and not take too much time about it. I suppose I was trying too hard not to hurt your feelings because you hurt mine. Now look at the mess I've made. I'll just confess how my feelings got hurt. It was the last message before you announced that the ball was rolling and everyone hop on. Remember that message? You aired your misconceptions about eVote as you explained that you were not biting, you were just a lucky-loo. Your message was long but here are a few excerpts for the flavor. > It sounds like the evote system is highly evolved, and very > real time responsive. I certainly look forward to the day when it > is the standard by which we measure the electronic democratic > process. And I am hungry to learn what "object orientation" and > "server specialization" mean. > However, it seems to me that we really need to get something > (anything) up and running now. My database guru is named Jack > social security at under $800.00 per month. I really identify > with your statement of being half alive. Are you single? Probably > not, smart girl like you must be good looking too. Probably lots > of men in your life. > else would be good though. I am looking forward to making the > call to your system and trying it out sometime, but it probably > wont be for a month or so, I am swamped. I will probably be out > of contact here till monday or tuesday. Got some tv shows to do. This pressed a big old and painful button in me. To me it read, "Sorry little girl, I don't understand you and I'm not going to take the trouble to understand you and by the way babe, how 'bout a date?" Pretty infuriating. And it wasn't "you are brilliant, are you single?", it was "you must be pretty, are you single?". You're only interested in my marital state if I'm pretty? Anyway ... men. Back to the subject. I will never ever in my life participate in a system where there are proxies. I'll just give away my proxie to the best choice -- as you point out, a bad one. I'm like most everybody else. Soon, participating as an individual will count for naught against the proxie mongers and all the proxie mongers will be power seekers and we'll be right back where we are now. If there are no proxies, then too, most everyone will be out of the system but the people who are left will be there to fight for causes they care about, not to get power for themselves in this system. I wish we'd hear from another woman. M. Frontier Systems --------------------- eVote - online voting software 3790 El Camino Real, #147 Palo Alto, CA 94306 USA Marilyn Davis, Ph.D. (415) 493-3631 --- [log in to unmask] --- Principal Software Engineer p.s. And yes, Tim could work with me to port eVote to his BBS software, no sweat. I already studied the problem. Although eVote does NOT support proxies, or privacy by voter instead of by item, or in addition to item, at this time; in the future it will support whatever the online eVoting community decides it should. And although eVote doesn't support proxies, Tim is perfectly within his rights, and welcome, to build his support for proxies around eVote's server. It could be a big commercial success. However, *** NO PROXIES IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM *** is the way to save the world.