<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_29_1816257</id>
	<title>Voting Drops 83 Percent In All-Digital Election</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1243587840000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>For the first time ever, Oahu residents had to use their <a href="http://www.kitv.com/politics/19573770/detail.html?treets=hon&amp;tml=hon\_9am&amp;ts=T&amp;tmi=hon\_9am\_1\_02000105272009">phones or computers to vote</a> with some surprising results. 7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people the previous year, a drop of about 83 percent. "It is disappointing, compared to two years ago. This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of. So again, this is a huge change and I know that, and given the budget, this is a best that we could do," said Joan Manke of the city Neighborhood Commission. She added that voters obviously did not know about or did not embrace the changes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the first time ever , Oahu residents had to use their phones or computers to vote with some surprising results .
7,300 people voted this year , compared to 44,000 people the previous year , a drop of about 83 percent .
" It is disappointing , compared to two years ago .
This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of .
So again , this is a huge change and I know that , and given the budget , this is a best that we could do , " said Joan Manke of the city Neighborhood Commission .
She added that voters obviously did not know about or did not embrace the changes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the first time ever, Oahu residents had to use their phones or computers to vote with some surprising results.
7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people the previous year, a drop of about 83 percent.
"It is disappointing, compared to two years ago.
This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of.
So again, this is a huge change and I know that, and given the budget, this is a best that we could do," said Joan Manke of the city Neighborhood Commission.
She added that voters obviously did not know about or did not embrace the changes.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145185</id>
	<title>this just in</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1243598640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the democratic process has been discontinued due to lack of interest &amp; lethargy</htmltext>
<tokenext>the democratic process has been discontinued due to lack of interest &amp; lethargy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the democratic process has been discontinued due to lack of interest &amp; lethargy</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143841</id>
	<title>A wild Manke appears!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No comment</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No comment</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No comment</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145135</id>
	<title>Re:No faith</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243598280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured, "why bother?"</p></div><p>Nah.  Dis stay Hawai'i brah, no ones know bout all da kine kapakai.  We's jus wen to da beach an forgot about da kine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured , " why bother ? " Nah .
Dis stay Hawai'i brah , no ones know bout all da kine kapakai .
We 's jus wen to da beach an forgot about da kine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured, "why bother?"Nah.
Dis stay Hawai'i brah, no ones know bout all da kine kapakai.
We's jus wen to da beach an forgot about da kine.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145999</id>
	<title>Another Possibility</title>
	<author>Sir\_Dill</author>
	<datestamp>1243604880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have never lived in Hawaii but my fiancee grew up there.<p>
Listening to the stories of Hawaii, It sounds like most of the local population is barely making a living.</p><p>
Hawaii is an expensive place to live and computers haven't quite supplanted the Television.  One could argue that TV still isn't ubiquitous in the US, however I would wager that there are far more households with televisions than there are with computers.</p><p>
So another possible reason is that people may not have the means to vote electronically.</p><p>
I am perfectly fine to pay for the gas and take the time to go vote.</p><p>
If I have to goto an internet cafe and pay to do it once I get there, I might be less inclined.</p><p>
Sure there is the library but I don't think that a couple of terminals at the public library are really going to pick up the slack.</p><p>
Not saying this is why there were fewer votes, a simple look at the demographics of who voted would go quite far in helping to answer the question though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never lived in Hawaii but my fiancee grew up there .
Listening to the stories of Hawaii , It sounds like most of the local population is barely making a living .
Hawaii is an expensive place to live and computers have n't quite supplanted the Television .
One could argue that TV still is n't ubiquitous in the US , however I would wager that there are far more households with televisions than there are with computers .
So another possible reason is that people may not have the means to vote electronically .
I am perfectly fine to pay for the gas and take the time to go vote .
If I have to goto an internet cafe and pay to do it once I get there , I might be less inclined .
Sure there is the library but I do n't think that a couple of terminals at the public library are really going to pick up the slack .
Not saying this is why there were fewer votes , a simple look at the demographics of who voted would go quite far in helping to answer the question though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never lived in Hawaii but my fiancee grew up there.
Listening to the stories of Hawaii, It sounds like most of the local population is barely making a living.
Hawaii is an expensive place to live and computers haven't quite supplanted the Television.
One could argue that TV still isn't ubiquitous in the US, however I would wager that there are far more households with televisions than there are with computers.
So another possible reason is that people may not have the means to vote electronically.
I am perfectly fine to pay for the gas and take the time to go vote.
If I have to goto an internet cafe and pay to do it once I get there, I might be less inclined.
Sure there is the library but I don't think that a couple of terminals at the public library are really going to pick up the slack.
Not saying this is why there were fewer votes, a simple look at the demographics of who voted would go quite far in helping to answer the question though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147465</id>
	<title>"Did not bother" != "Feared Retribution"</title>
	<author>cowtamer</author>
	<datestamp>1243623900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I personally would abstain from such an election on principle alone.  It is impossible to \_guarantee\_ that your vote will be kept anonymous.</p><p>[The only way to guarantee such a thing would be to require people to pick up single use digital keys printed on paper from a physical location and use these as login credentials.  Even then, you'd have to vote using a digital proxy or from an internet cafe, all of which undermines the so called "convenience" of an all digital election].</p><p>Who knows what kind of unprovable inconveniences might befall you if you vote for the guy who ends up losing? (if not now, in the future once a political machine figures out how to exploit such information...)</p><p>For a democracy to work, Secret ballots should be secret and marked on hard, tangible, non-electronic paper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I personally would abstain from such an election on principle alone .
It is impossible to \ _guarantee \ _ that your vote will be kept anonymous .
[ The only way to guarantee such a thing would be to require people to pick up single use digital keys printed on paper from a physical location and use these as login credentials .
Even then , you 'd have to vote using a digital proxy or from an internet cafe , all of which undermines the so called " convenience " of an all digital election ] .Who knows what kind of unprovable inconveniences might befall you if you vote for the guy who ends up losing ?
( if not now , in the future once a political machine figures out how to exploit such information... ) For a democracy to work , Secret ballots should be secret and marked on hard , tangible , non-electronic paper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I personally would abstain from such an election on principle alone.
It is impossible to \_guarantee\_ that your vote will be kept anonymous.
[The only way to guarantee such a thing would be to require people to pick up single use digital keys printed on paper from a physical location and use these as login credentials.
Even then, you'd have to vote using a digital proxy or from an internet cafe, all of which undermines the so called "convenience" of an all digital election].Who knows what kind of unprovable inconveniences might befall you if you vote for the guy who ends up losing?
(if not now, in the future once a political machine figures out how to exploit such information...)For a democracy to work, Secret ballots should be secret and marked on hard, tangible, non-electronic paper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147537</id>
	<title>Perhaps last year was not a typical election year</title>
	<author>jimfrost</author>
	<datestamp>1243625100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since they don't give numbers for several years, but only compare this election to an election last year, I wonder whether or not last year's 44,000 number was due to large turnouts as a result of a presidential election cycle.  I know that my town sees numbers an order of magnitude higher with such elections than the "norm", and in years that don't have either presidential or national representative races, like this one, the numbers are abysmal.<p>

Not that I don't believe the mechanism they used hurt their numbers, just that it might not have been the only cause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since they do n't give numbers for several years , but only compare this election to an election last year , I wonder whether or not last year 's 44,000 number was due to large turnouts as a result of a presidential election cycle .
I know that my town sees numbers an order of magnitude higher with such elections than the " norm " , and in years that do n't have either presidential or national representative races , like this one , the numbers are abysmal .
Not that I do n't believe the mechanism they used hurt their numbers , just that it might not have been the only cause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since they don't give numbers for several years, but only compare this election to an election last year, I wonder whether or not last year's 44,000 number was due to large turnouts as a result of a presidential election cycle.
I know that my town sees numbers an order of magnitude higher with such elections than the "norm", and in years that don't have either presidential or national representative races, like this one, the numbers are abysmal.
Not that I don't believe the mechanism they used hurt their numbers, just that it might not have been the only cause.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28153729</id>
	<title>You're doing it wrong</title>
	<author>InternetVoting</author>
	<datestamp>1243687020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The people running this election missed the point and thus all the benefits of internet voting. The name of the game is turnout. For that you need to give the electorate the widest array of simple options. First, there wasn't much simple about the solution provided by the UK\Australian company (Everyone Counts) that supplied the internet voting software. The voting system, even with the drastically low turnout was overwhelmed and <a href="http://kxmb.com/news/nation/381988.htm" title="kxmb.com">slow response times and timeouts</a> [kxmb.com]. Further the system used a java applet as a security solution, which just adds to the incompatibility problems.<br> <br>
The largest folly with this election though is that they forced internet voting on the electorate. Internet voting is about giving people additional options, not restricting them. The bottom line is crap technology and poor decisions can kill any project.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The people running this election missed the point and thus all the benefits of internet voting .
The name of the game is turnout .
For that you need to give the electorate the widest array of simple options .
First , there was n't much simple about the solution provided by the UK \ Australian company ( Everyone Counts ) that supplied the internet voting software .
The voting system , even with the drastically low turnout was overwhelmed and slow response times and timeouts [ kxmb.com ] .
Further the system used a java applet as a security solution , which just adds to the incompatibility problems .
The largest folly with this election though is that they forced internet voting on the electorate .
Internet voting is about giving people additional options , not restricting them .
The bottom line is crap technology and poor decisions can kill any project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The people running this election missed the point and thus all the benefits of internet voting.
The name of the game is turnout.
For that you need to give the electorate the widest array of simple options.
First, there wasn't much simple about the solution provided by the UK\Australian company (Everyone Counts) that supplied the internet voting software.
The voting system, even with the drastically low turnout was overwhelmed and slow response times and timeouts [kxmb.com].
Further the system used a java applet as a security solution, which just adds to the incompatibility problems.
The largest folly with this election though is that they forced internet voting on the electorate.
Internet voting is about giving people additional options, not restricting them.
The bottom line is crap technology and poor decisions can kill any project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515</id>
	<title>look, morons:</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1243594740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>paper voting: cheap<br>electronic voting: expensive</p><p>paper voting: 10x attack vectors to corrupt it<br>electronic voting: 1,000x attack vectors to corrupt it</p><p>the richest, most advanced, technophilic nation and the poorest most backwards nation should all vote the same way: paper ballot</p><p>anything else is simply paying more $ just for more ways to corrupt the vote. a democracy is based on legitimacy of the vote. if you cast doubt on that legitimacy, if there is any taint in the process of voting, and electronic voting allows for myriad more ways to do just that, then you destroy people's faith in their own government</p><p>this is not a joke, please stop with the electronic voting. its downright dangerous as it threatens the legitimacy of elected officials in the eyes of the people due to its black box nature: votes go in, leader comes out, who the fuck knows what kind of sausage is in the middle</p><p>yes, you can still fuck around with stacks of paper with checkmarks on them and mess with the vote thataways. but in a lot less ways, and a lot less opaquely, and you need a lot of cooperation and hard work. one well-placed hacker can change millions of votes in untraceable ways in milliseconds with electronic voting</p><p>in the case of close elections, you have ballots to fall back on that many human eyes can see and hold in their hands and tally for themselves. what do you have with electronic voting? a bunch of bits of doubtful provenance on a hard disk and some easily corruptible bureaucrat saying "trust me". fuck that. i'd rather a close vote take 3 months to tally on paper than a 3 second tally of votes of a black box nature</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>paper voting : cheapelectronic voting : expensivepaper voting : 10x attack vectors to corrupt itelectronic voting : 1,000x attack vectors to corrupt itthe richest , most advanced , technophilic nation and the poorest most backwards nation should all vote the same way : paper ballotanything else is simply paying more $ just for more ways to corrupt the vote .
a democracy is based on legitimacy of the vote .
if you cast doubt on that legitimacy , if there is any taint in the process of voting , and electronic voting allows for myriad more ways to do just that , then you destroy people 's faith in their own governmentthis is not a joke , please stop with the electronic voting .
its downright dangerous as it threatens the legitimacy of elected officials in the eyes of the people due to its black box nature : votes go in , leader comes out , who the fuck knows what kind of sausage is in the middleyes , you can still fuck around with stacks of paper with checkmarks on them and mess with the vote thataways .
but in a lot less ways , and a lot less opaquely , and you need a lot of cooperation and hard work .
one well-placed hacker can change millions of votes in untraceable ways in milliseconds with electronic votingin the case of close elections , you have ballots to fall back on that many human eyes can see and hold in their hands and tally for themselves .
what do you have with electronic voting ?
a bunch of bits of doubtful provenance on a hard disk and some easily corruptible bureaucrat saying " trust me " .
fuck that .
i 'd rather a close vote take 3 months to tally on paper than a 3 second tally of votes of a black box nature</tokentext>
<sentencetext>paper voting: cheapelectronic voting: expensivepaper voting: 10x attack vectors to corrupt itelectronic voting: 1,000x attack vectors to corrupt itthe richest, most advanced, technophilic nation and the poorest most backwards nation should all vote the same way: paper ballotanything else is simply paying more $ just for more ways to corrupt the vote.
a democracy is based on legitimacy of the vote.
if you cast doubt on that legitimacy, if there is any taint in the process of voting, and electronic voting allows for myriad more ways to do just that, then you destroy people's faith in their own governmentthis is not a joke, please stop with the electronic voting.
its downright dangerous as it threatens the legitimacy of elected officials in the eyes of the people due to its black box nature: votes go in, leader comes out, who the fuck knows what kind of sausage is in the middleyes, you can still fuck around with stacks of paper with checkmarks on them and mess with the vote thataways.
but in a lot less ways, and a lot less opaquely, and you need a lot of cooperation and hard work.
one well-placed hacker can change millions of votes in untraceable ways in milliseconds with electronic votingin the case of close elections, you have ballots to fall back on that many human eyes can see and hold in their hands and tally for themselves.
what do you have with electronic voting?
a bunch of bits of doubtful provenance on a hard disk and some easily corruptible bureaucrat saying "trust me".
fuck that.
i'd rather a close vote take 3 months to tally on paper than a 3 second tally of votes of a black box nature</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28154951</id>
	<title>1984</title>
	<author>schrodingers\_rabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1243698600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All new technologies take a long time to start up. Internet voting saves paper, not to mention ballot counting time. The sheer ease of use for computer owners will make up for the high error potential- after all, who notices who runs our country? Besides the citizens. And the strongly US-linked international economy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All new technologies take a long time to start up .
Internet voting saves paper , not to mention ballot counting time .
The sheer ease of use for computer owners will make up for the high error potential- after all , who notices who runs our country ?
Besides the citizens .
And the strongly US-linked international economy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All new technologies take a long time to start up.
Internet voting saves paper, not to mention ballot counting time.
The sheer ease of use for computer owners will make up for the high error potential- after all, who notices who runs our country?
Besides the citizens.
And the strongly US-linked international economy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28149335</id>
	<title>It's the election Stupid</title>
	<author>Bruha</author>
	<datestamp>1243698060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets see, presidential election with Obama on the ticket, vs election with the mayor on the ticket.  Hmmm hard choice, nobody really cares about a mayor.  We have 44k registered voters here and 67\% voted last year for the president, and this year's city council elections only 2\% voted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets see , presidential election with Obama on the ticket , vs election with the mayor on the ticket .
Hmmm hard choice , nobody really cares about a mayor .
We have 44k registered voters here and 67 \ % voted last year for the president , and this year 's city council elections only 2 \ % voted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets see, presidential election with Obama on the ticket, vs election with the mayor on the ticket.
Hmmm hard choice, nobody really cares about a mayor.
We have 44k registered voters here and 67\% voted last year for the president, and this year's city council elections only 2\% voted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146367</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1243608720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We need more all-digital elections. I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.</p></div><p>This should be modded insightful; not funny.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need more all-digital elections .
I do n't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.This should be modded insightful ; not funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need more all-digital elections.
I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.This should be modded insightful; not funny.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144955</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1243597200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In before Rick Astley becomes President of Oahu.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In before Rick Astley becomes President of Oahu .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In before Rick Astley becomes President of Oahu.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143899</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144407</id>
	<title>Senator Ted Stevens called it....</title>
	<author>swanzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1243594140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material</htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you do n't understand , those tubes can be filled and if they are filled , when you put your message in , it gets in line and it 's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material , enormous amounts of material</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147303</id>
	<title>Re:Way of the future - Get used to it</title>
	<author>[Zappo]</author>
	<datestamp>1243621140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>Please see also my comment above:<br><a href="http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1249937&amp;cid=28147257" title="slashdot.org">http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1249937&amp;cid=28147257</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>It's not really clear that "the level of techno-scrutiny we need" is even theoretically possible.  Many smart people have been thinking carefully about this problem for over a decade, and their conclusions on all-electronic systems are generally "don't do it."  (Incidentally this is the same conclusion I reached while doing my master's work on the subject in 1999.)  Paper ballots (printing them from electronic boxes is OK, as long as voters can read them) turn out to have really crucial characteristics.</p><p>As for, "It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis," some people might argue about whether referendums-on-everything is a good model for government, and I'll leave that (probably compelling) argument to any political science types who chime in.  However you have reminded me of a point I missed in my earlier post, which is that preserving audit trails and secret ballots isn't the only thing the paper ballot system gives us.  It also gives us a voting booth.  Why is that important, you ask?  Well, so that your boss can't sit you down in the office and watch you vote the company line; so that you won't be pressured by friends at "voting parties" with a common computer at someone's home, etc., etc.  The voting booth provides privacy, an essential element of the secret ballot system.</p><p>Now if as a society we were to discard the secret ballot system, I'd see many feasible technical approaches for voting systems.  That would be an interesting topic for any political science types, too -- I'd be curious to see that debate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,Please see also my comment above : http : //news.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1249937&amp;cid = 28147257 [ slashdot.org ] It 's not really clear that " the level of techno-scrutiny we need " is even theoretically possible .
Many smart people have been thinking carefully about this problem for over a decade , and their conclusions on all-electronic systems are generally " do n't do it .
" ( Incidentally this is the same conclusion I reached while doing my master 's work on the subject in 1999 .
) Paper ballots ( printing them from electronic boxes is OK , as long as voters can read them ) turn out to have really crucial characteristics.As for , " It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis , " some people might argue about whether referendums-on-everything is a good model for government , and I 'll leave that ( probably compelling ) argument to any political science types who chime in .
However you have reminded me of a point I missed in my earlier post , which is that preserving audit trails and secret ballots is n't the only thing the paper ballot system gives us .
It also gives us a voting booth .
Why is that important , you ask ?
Well , so that your boss ca n't sit you down in the office and watch you vote the company line ; so that you wo n't be pressured by friends at " voting parties " with a common computer at someone 's home , etc. , etc .
The voting booth provides privacy , an essential element of the secret ballot system.Now if as a society we were to discard the secret ballot system , I 'd see many feasible technical approaches for voting systems .
That would be an interesting topic for any political science types , too -- I 'd be curious to see that debate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,Please see also my comment above:http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1249937&amp;cid=28147257 [slashdot.org]It's not really clear that "the level of techno-scrutiny we need" is even theoretically possible.
Many smart people have been thinking carefully about this problem for over a decade, and their conclusions on all-electronic systems are generally "don't do it.
"  (Incidentally this is the same conclusion I reached while doing my master's work on the subject in 1999.
)  Paper ballots (printing them from electronic boxes is OK, as long as voters can read them) turn out to have really crucial characteristics.As for, "It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis," some people might argue about whether referendums-on-everything is a good model for government, and I'll leave that (probably compelling) argument to any political science types who chime in.
However you have reminded me of a point I missed in my earlier post, which is that preserving audit trails and secret ballots isn't the only thing the paper ballot system gives us.
It also gives us a voting booth.
Why is that important, you ask?
Well, so that your boss can't sit you down in the office and watch you vote the company line; so that you won't be pressured by friends at "voting parties" with a common computer at someone's home, etc., etc.
The voting booth provides privacy, an essential element of the secret ballot system.Now if as a society we were to discard the secret ballot system, I'd see many feasible technical approaches for voting systems.
That would be an interesting topic for any political science types, too -- I'd be curious to see that debate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143941</id>
	<title>digital ballot stuffing</title>
	<author>madbavarian</author>
	<datestamp>1243591920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Give them a couple of years and the digital ballot stuffing software will get better.  The voter numbers should be waaaay up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Give them a couple of years and the digital ballot stuffing software will get better .
The voter numbers should be waaaay up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Give them a couple of years and the digital ballot stuffing software will get better.
The voter numbers should be waaaay up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143859</id>
	<title>Oahu?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oahu" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oahu</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oahu [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oahu [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147511</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243624680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you read comments on YouTube lately? That doesn't bode well for intelligence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you read comments on YouTube lately ?
That does n't bode well for intelligence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you read comments on YouTube lately?
That doesn't bode well for intelligence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143931</id>
	<title>Why bother when you know its hacked?</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1243591860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect the feeling is that any election taking place over the net or the phone system is so easily hackable as to become laughable.</p><p>There is no changeable paper trail for this, contrary to the trend nationally to require same.</p><p>How long till botnets on the island (or elsewhere) start selling election stealing services?</p><p>Ok, now expect the defenders telling us this is all impossible and calling me a Luddite in 3, 2, 1...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect the feeling is that any election taking place over the net or the phone system is so easily hackable as to become laughable.There is no changeable paper trail for this , contrary to the trend nationally to require same.How long till botnets on the island ( or elsewhere ) start selling election stealing services ? Ok , now expect the defenders telling us this is all impossible and calling me a Luddite in 3 , 2 , 1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect the feeling is that any election taking place over the net or the phone system is so easily hackable as to become laughable.There is no changeable paper trail for this, contrary to the trend nationally to require same.How long till botnets on the island (or elsewhere) start selling election stealing services?Ok, now expect the defenders telling us this is all impossible and calling me a Luddite in 3, 2, 1...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144135</id>
	<title>Engagement</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1243592640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Election Day is traditionally a social event - it brings a neighborhood, a community together. The girl scouts will have baked goods on sale. There will time to meet and talk with friends. Kids will get their first taste of "voting" on their own. For seniors it is a matter of pride that they still have the wit and will and strength to participate. These things are important in a democracy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Election Day is traditionally a social event - it brings a neighborhood , a community together .
The girl scouts will have baked goods on sale .
There will time to meet and talk with friends .
Kids will get their first taste of " voting " on their own .
For seniors it is a matter of pride that they still have the wit and will and strength to participate .
These things are important in a democracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Election Day is traditionally a social event - it brings a neighborhood, a community together.
The girl scouts will have baked goods on sale.
There will time to meet and talk with friends.
Kids will get their first taste of "voting" on their own.
For seniors it is a matter of pride that they still have the wit and will and strength to participate.
These things are important in a democracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145339</id>
	<title>Aaaaargh!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243599780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Call me a Luddite, but elections should be done exclusively with optical scan ballots--either in person or by mail-in absentee. This is the way it is in counties like mine that didn't fall for the touchscreen scam.</p><p>For voters with disabilities, a computer equipped with headphones and a keypad should allow them to make choices that wind up printing a real, marked ballot, which they can feed into the precinct scanner.</p><p>All software used in the scanners, ADA computers, and central tabulators should be 100\% open source.</p><p>All election ballots--and ballots used in tests to certify voting equipment--should be retained indefinitely in a secure storage area with fire sprinklers. This takes up a lot less space than one might think.</p><p>I've noted before that the paper ballot system IS open to voter coercion--an employer could force their employees to request absentee ballots, sign the affidavits, and turn them in. Thing is, doing this would be very logistically difficult, and the boss would wind up in prison.</p><p>So let's say we allow voting by phone or Web. Now we're talking about easier voter coercion:</p><p>Your Boss: "If you like your job, you'll give me your username and password to the elections system and let me vote for you."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Call me a Luddite , but elections should be done exclusively with optical scan ballots--either in person or by mail-in absentee .
This is the way it is in counties like mine that did n't fall for the touchscreen scam.For voters with disabilities , a computer equipped with headphones and a keypad should allow them to make choices that wind up printing a real , marked ballot , which they can feed into the precinct scanner.All software used in the scanners , ADA computers , and central tabulators should be 100 \ % open source.All election ballots--and ballots used in tests to certify voting equipment--should be retained indefinitely in a secure storage area with fire sprinklers .
This takes up a lot less space than one might think.I 've noted before that the paper ballot system IS open to voter coercion--an employer could force their employees to request absentee ballots , sign the affidavits , and turn them in .
Thing is , doing this would be very logistically difficult , and the boss would wind up in prison.So let 's say we allow voting by phone or Web .
Now we 're talking about easier voter coercion : Your Boss : " If you like your job , you 'll give me your username and password to the elections system and let me vote for you .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Call me a Luddite, but elections should be done exclusively with optical scan ballots--either in person or by mail-in absentee.
This is the way it is in counties like mine that didn't fall for the touchscreen scam.For voters with disabilities, a computer equipped with headphones and a keypad should allow them to make choices that wind up printing a real, marked ballot, which they can feed into the precinct scanner.All software used in the scanners, ADA computers, and central tabulators should be 100\% open source.All election ballots--and ballots used in tests to certify voting equipment--should be retained indefinitely in a secure storage area with fire sprinklers.
This takes up a lot less space than one might think.I've noted before that the paper ballot system IS open to voter coercion--an employer could force their employees to request absentee ballots, sign the affidavits, and turn them in.
Thing is, doing this would be very logistically difficult, and the boss would wind up in prison.So let's say we allow voting by phone or Web.
Now we're talking about easier voter coercion:Your Boss: "If you like your job, you'll give me your username and password to the elections system and let me vote for you.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144077</id>
	<title>We could fix Social Security and Medicare...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243592400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I vote for the guy that will increase taxes and cut spending.  My parents and grandparents vote for the guy that decreases taxes and increases spending.</p><p>Clearly, someone is wrong.  Maybe I should blame my high school algebra teacher.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I vote for the guy that will increase taxes and cut spending .
My parents and grandparents vote for the guy that decreases taxes and increases spending.Clearly , someone is wrong .
Maybe I should blame my high school algebra teacher .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I vote for the guy that will increase taxes and cut spending.
My parents and grandparents vote for the guy that decreases taxes and increases spending.Clearly, someone is wrong.
Maybe I should blame my high school algebra teacher.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379</id>
	<title>Way of the future - Get used to it</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1243593960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An Internet based vote is way more cost-effective and easy to setup and conduct than a paper one.</p><p>This kind of technology will become the norm.</p><p>It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis.</p><p>The security issues are solvable through use of open-source standards, and clever<br>encryption schemes, that can be verified by thousands of independent<br>programmers and mathematicians.</p><p>Admittedly we don't have the level of techno-scrutiny we need on these things yet,<br>but it will come.</p><p>The bigger problem with democracy is how to educate people so they can maintain a<br>relatively rational and independent opinion in the face of media carpet-mindbombing<br>campaigns, and how we motivate people to believe that their opinion matters.<br>Stupidity and apathy. That's what we have to fight for for democracy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An Internet based vote is way more cost-effective and easy to setup and conduct than a paper one.This kind of technology will become the norm.It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis.The security issues are solvable through use of open-source standards , and cleverencryption schemes , that can be verified by thousands of independentprogrammers and mathematicians.Admittedly we do n't have the level of techno-scrutiny we need on these things yet,but it will come.The bigger problem with democracy is how to educate people so they can maintain arelatively rational and independent opinion in the face of media carpet-mindbombingcampaigns , and how we motivate people to believe that their opinion matters.Stupidity and apathy .
That 's what we have to fight for for democracy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An Internet based vote is way more cost-effective and easy to setup and conduct than a paper one.This kind of technology will become the norm.It will permit consultation of populations on a much more frequent basis.The security issues are solvable through use of open-source standards, and cleverencryption schemes, that can be verified by thousands of independentprogrammers and mathematicians.Admittedly we don't have the level of techno-scrutiny we need on these things yet,but it will come.The bigger problem with democracy is how to educate people so they can maintain arelatively rational and independent opinion in the face of media carpet-mindbombingcampaigns, and how we motivate people to believe that their opinion matters.Stupidity and apathy.
That's what we have to fight for for democracy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144149</id>
	<title>Why vote electronically?</title>
	<author>plopez</author>
	<datestamp>1243592700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Insecure and I miss the fun of showing up. In my state for the primary we did a caucus which was load and disorganized. I loved it. Not choreographed or controlled. Total chaos. As true democracy should be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Insecure and I miss the fun of showing up .
In my state for the primary we did a caucus which was load and disorganized .
I loved it .
Not choreographed or controlled .
Total chaos .
As true democracy should be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Insecure and I miss the fun of showing up.
In my state for the primary we did a caucus which was load and disorganized.
I loved it.
Not choreographed or controlled.
Total chaos.
As true democracy should be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861</id>
	<title>No faith</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured, "why bother?" I can't say that I blame them. I would probably have a similar attitude. What's the point of voting if you have no faith in the accuracy of the results?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured , " why bother ?
" I ca n't say that I blame them .
I would probably have a similar attitude .
What 's the point of voting if you have no faith in the accuracy of the results ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they had just heard about how abysmally inaccurate previous all-digital elections had been and figured, "why bother?
" I can't say that I blame them.
I would probably have a similar attitude.
What's the point of voting if you have no faith in the accuracy of the results?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145619</id>
	<title>That's funny.</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1243601700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>68,000 people <b>thought</b> they voted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>68,000 people thought they voted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>68,000 people thought they voted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146767</id>
	<title>Dumbest journalist ever?</title>
	<author>DXLster</author>
	<datestamp>1243614240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So...<br>a) what was the election FOR?<br>b) how can you compare the voter turnout for a year with ZERO federal representation ballots against the damn 2008 election!??!?!</p><p>These seem like awfully rudimentary questions to ask if you're writing this story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So...a ) what was the election FOR ? b ) how can you compare the voter turnout for a year with ZERO federal representation ballots against the damn 2008 election ! ? ? ! ?
! These seem like awfully rudimentary questions to ask if you 're writing this story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So...a) what was the election FOR?b) how can you compare the voter turnout for a year with ZERO federal representation ballots against the damn 2008 election!??!?
!These seem like awfully rudimentary questions to ask if you're writing this story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147947</id>
	<title>Re:What were the reasons?</title>
	<author>sodul</author>
	<datestamp>1243674780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I'm not a US citizen but have been living there since 2001. I'm still allowed to vote for a few of my home country elections. To do so I either vote by mail/internet or go to the consulate in San Francisco, drive 1-2hs, wait in line 2hs and risk being turned away because I don't have the proper document with me.</p><p>For the presidential elections (not the US ones) they actually opened voting booths all over the bay area and I only had to drive 5 miles to vote. There was a huge turnaround, and people in line felt that they were actually doing their civic duty.</p><p>There are new elections going on right now, but this time it's only by mail/internet, I'll try to vote if I remember before the due date, but it's very likely I will just forget to do it and remember a day or week too late.</p><p>So yes, the fact that you can go to an official place to physically place your ballot makes a big difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I 'm not a US citizen but have been living there since 2001 .
I 'm still allowed to vote for a few of my home country elections .
To do so I either vote by mail/internet or go to the consulate in San Francisco , drive 1-2hs , wait in line 2hs and risk being turned away because I do n't have the proper document with me.For the presidential elections ( not the US ones ) they actually opened voting booths all over the bay area and I only had to drive 5 miles to vote .
There was a huge turnaround , and people in line felt that they were actually doing their civic duty.There are new elections going on right now , but this time it 's only by mail/internet , I 'll try to vote if I remember before the due date , but it 's very likely I will just forget to do it and remember a day or week too late.So yes , the fact that you can go to an official place to physically place your ballot makes a big difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I'm not a US citizen but have been living there since 2001.
I'm still allowed to vote for a few of my home country elections.
To do so I either vote by mail/internet or go to the consulate in San Francisco, drive 1-2hs, wait in line 2hs and risk being turned away because I don't have the proper document with me.For the presidential elections (not the US ones) they actually opened voting booths all over the bay area and I only had to drive 5 miles to vote.
There was a huge turnaround, and people in line felt that they were actually doing their civic duty.There are new elections going on right now, but this time it's only by mail/internet, I'll try to vote if I remember before the due date, but it's very likely I will just forget to do it and remember a day or week too late.So yes, the fact that you can go to an official place to physically place your ballot makes a big difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143917</id>
	<title>7300 votes?</title>
	<author>NotBornYesterday</author>
	<datestamp>1243591800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or was that 1 guy cracking the system and voting 7300 times?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or was that 1 guy cracking the system and voting 7300 times ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or was that 1 guy cracking the system and voting 7300 times?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147087</id>
	<title>ballot stuffers not getting with times?</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1243617600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One possibility being that rampant paper-ballot-stuffing was curtailed and that the vote count now is closer to real?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One possibility being that rampant paper-ballot-stuffing was curtailed and that the vote count now is closer to real ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One possibility being that rampant paper-ballot-stuffing was curtailed and that the vote count now is closer to real?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144525</id>
	<title>The worst news . . .</title>
	<author>hcetSJ</author>
	<datestamp>1243594800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>was that those 7,300 votes were all cast by the same person.</htmltext>
<tokenext>was that those 7,300 votes were all cast by the same person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>was that those 7,300 votes were all cast by the same person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28148981</id>
	<title>That's the wrong question to ask</title>
	<author>Karljohan</author>
	<datestamp>1243694460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I want to know is: how can the party that lost be sure that the system just didn't delete a lot of votes?</p><p>Voting system using pieces of paper:<br>1) each person gets listed on a piece of paper<br>2) each person puts another piece of paper with the vote on in a box<br>3) at the same time your name is marked on the first list<br>4) when the voting period is over the vote papers in the box are counted<br>Anyone interested in upholding democratic values may overview the process and it doesn't require much intelligence to understand if something is wrong in the process.</p><p>Voting system using computers:<br>1) someone claims that there is a program that you can vote on<br>2) people press buttons and do stuff with some program that may or may not be that same program<br>3) after the voting period is over someone claims a result<br>Not even people that believe that they are knowledgeable in the technology used are allowed to overview even parts of the process since it's secret and the less knowledgeable have no clue whatsoever. Also bear in mind that a chain is never stronger than the weakest link which in this case may even be a spreadsheet file and a person trying to cut and paste vote counts together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I want to know is : how can the party that lost be sure that the system just did n't delete a lot of votes ? Voting system using pieces of paper : 1 ) each person gets listed on a piece of paper2 ) each person puts another piece of paper with the vote on in a box3 ) at the same time your name is marked on the first list4 ) when the voting period is over the vote papers in the box are countedAnyone interested in upholding democratic values may overview the process and it does n't require much intelligence to understand if something is wrong in the process.Voting system using computers : 1 ) someone claims that there is a program that you can vote on2 ) people press buttons and do stuff with some program that may or may not be that same program3 ) after the voting period is over someone claims a resultNot even people that believe that they are knowledgeable in the technology used are allowed to overview even parts of the process since it 's secret and the less knowledgeable have no clue whatsoever .
Also bear in mind that a chain is never stronger than the weakest link which in this case may even be a spreadsheet file and a person trying to cut and paste vote counts together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I want to know is: how can the party that lost be sure that the system just didn't delete a lot of votes?Voting system using pieces of paper:1) each person gets listed on a piece of paper2) each person puts another piece of paper with the vote on in a box3) at the same time your name is marked on the first list4) when the voting period is over the vote papers in the box are countedAnyone interested in upholding democratic values may overview the process and it doesn't require much intelligence to understand if something is wrong in the process.Voting system using computers:1) someone claims that there is a program that you can vote on2) people press buttons and do stuff with some program that may or may not be that same program3) after the voting period is over someone claims a resultNot even people that believe that they are knowledgeable in the technology used are allowed to overview even parts of the process since it's secret and the less knowledgeable have no clue whatsoever.
Also bear in mind that a chain is never stronger than the weakest link which in this case may even be a spreadsheet file and a person trying to cut and paste vote counts together.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144501</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother when you know its hacked?</title>
	<author>geekboy642</author>
	<datestamp>1243594680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ACORN is a red herring. The people out gathering voter registrations are payed per name. Federal regulations require ACORN to submit every single name they gather; they are not allowed to strike obvious forgeries before handing them to the government. It is the government's responsibility--because they've demanded the sole power--to strike invalid voters from the rolls. Moreover, you have to prove your identity when you vote. If there's a problem with people showing up with forged ID to prove they're someone who died 2 years ago, the fail is obvious. Voter registration drives hurt nobody. Voter disenfranchisement and lawsuits over hanging chads hurt everybody.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ACORN is a red herring .
The people out gathering voter registrations are payed per name .
Federal regulations require ACORN to submit every single name they gather ; they are not allowed to strike obvious forgeries before handing them to the government .
It is the government 's responsibility--because they 've demanded the sole power--to strike invalid voters from the rolls .
Moreover , you have to prove your identity when you vote .
If there 's a problem with people showing up with forged ID to prove they 're someone who died 2 years ago , the fail is obvious .
Voter registration drives hurt nobody .
Voter disenfranchisement and lawsuits over hanging chads hurt everybody .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ACORN is a red herring.
The people out gathering voter registrations are payed per name.
Federal regulations require ACORN to submit every single name they gather; they are not allowed to strike obvious forgeries before handing them to the government.
It is the government's responsibility--because they've demanded the sole power--to strike invalid voters from the rolls.
Moreover, you have to prove your identity when you vote.
If there's a problem with people showing up with forged ID to prove they're someone who died 2 years ago, the fail is obvious.
Voter registration drives hurt nobody.
Voter disenfranchisement and lawsuits over hanging chads hurt everybody.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144243</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143883</id>
	<title>Age demographics?</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1243591680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd love to see the age demographics on who voted/didn't vote in this election.  Is it unreasonable to expect that only the 18-25 year old's were able to even achieve a quorum among their age group?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd love to see the age demographics on who voted/did n't vote in this election .
Is it unreasonable to expect that only the 18-25 year old 's were able to even achieve a quorum among their age group ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd love to see the age demographics on who voted/didn't vote in this election.
Is it unreasonable to expect that only the 18-25 year old's were able to even achieve a quorum among their age group?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144437</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243594260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"She added that voters obviously . . . did not embrace the changes."<br><br>No shit, Sherlock. Now get back to work on a system people can TRUST.<br>Report back here when you've finished.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" She added that voters obviously .
. .
did not embrace the changes .
" No shit , Sherlock .
Now get back to work on a system people can TRUST.Report back here when you 've finished .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"She added that voters obviously .
. .
did not embrace the changes.
"No shit, Sherlock.
Now get back to work on a system people can TRUST.Report back here when you've finished.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145767</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>riverat1</author>
	<datestamp>1243603080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know perfectly well how to use a computer but if this was an election I could vote in I would have refused to use any balloting system that doesn't produce a hardcopy ballot that I could hold in my hand and personally verify.  Voting is too important (although maybe not in this particular election for a neighborhood association) to allow use of a method that is so easily hacked.  If I was in this jurisdiction I would file suit to force them to prove that the voting was secure, capable of being accurately counted and recounted and private.  No voting over phone lines or the internet can be guaranteed to be private unless perhaps you're using NSA level encryption devices on both ends and even then I'd be suspicious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know perfectly well how to use a computer but if this was an election I could vote in I would have refused to use any balloting system that does n't produce a hardcopy ballot that I could hold in my hand and personally verify .
Voting is too important ( although maybe not in this particular election for a neighborhood association ) to allow use of a method that is so easily hacked .
If I was in this jurisdiction I would file suit to force them to prove that the voting was secure , capable of being accurately counted and recounted and private .
No voting over phone lines or the internet can be guaranteed to be private unless perhaps you 're using NSA level encryption devices on both ends and even then I 'd be suspicious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know perfectly well how to use a computer but if this was an election I could vote in I would have refused to use any balloting system that doesn't produce a hardcopy ballot that I could hold in my hand and personally verify.
Voting is too important (although maybe not in this particular election for a neighborhood association) to allow use of a method that is so easily hacked.
If I was in this jurisdiction I would file suit to force them to prove that the voting was secure, capable of being accurately counted and recounted and private.
No voting over phone lines or the internet can be guaranteed to be private unless perhaps you're using NSA level encryption devices on both ends and even then I'd be suspicious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144075</id>
	<title>Something was lost.</title>
	<author>AnotherBlackHat</author>
	<datestamp>1243592400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>83\% fewer votes were counted.<br>That might means 83\% fewer voters, which is a significant loss of confidence, or it could mean 83\% of the votes were lost.<br>Either way, I'd say the system is a failure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>83 \ % fewer votes were counted.That might means 83 \ % fewer voters , which is a significant loss of confidence , or it could mean 83 \ % of the votes were lost.Either way , I 'd say the system is a failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>83\% fewer votes were counted.That might means 83\% fewer voters, which is a significant loss of confidence, or it could mean 83\% of the votes were lost.Either way, I'd say the system is a failure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152011</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243675680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We need more all-digital elections. I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.</p></div><p>Fuck you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need more all-digital elections .
I do n't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.Fuck you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need more all-digital elections.
I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.Fuck you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145967</id>
	<title>Re:What were the reasons?</title>
	<author>riverat1</author>
	<datestamp>1243604580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it was me I would have refused to use such an insecure, hackable method of voting and would have demanded a paper ballot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it was me I would have refused to use such an insecure , hackable method of voting and would have demanded a paper ballot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it was me I would have refused to use such an insecure, hackable method of voting and would have demanded a paper ballot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144377</id>
	<title>maybe, just maybe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243593960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... maybe the numbers are off because there is no ballot stuffing and dead people voting as in prior elections... I'm just sayin...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... maybe the numbers are off because there is no ballot stuffing and dead people voting as in prior elections... I 'm just sayin.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... maybe the numbers are off because there is no ballot stuffing and dead people voting as in prior elections... I'm just sayin...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147661</id>
	<title>Re:No faith</title>
	<author>mrcaseyj</author>
	<datestamp>1243627080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do these election officials realize that law enforcement has an array of software available to secretly take control of cell phones? They use it to turn the microphone on so they can listen in on what's being said in the room. The software keeps the display and power lights off so the target doesn't even know the cell phone is listening in. The only way to stop this is to remove the battery from the phone. Should we just trust the CIA to tell us who won the election? Are we supposed to trust that this cellphone spyware won't make it into the wrong hands?

I love computers, but computer and cell phone voting are extremely dangerous to democracy. Even if it's not happening in your area, It's a great danger to the entire country.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do these election officials realize that law enforcement has an array of software available to secretly take control of cell phones ?
They use it to turn the microphone on so they can listen in on what 's being said in the room .
The software keeps the display and power lights off so the target does n't even know the cell phone is listening in .
The only way to stop this is to remove the battery from the phone .
Should we just trust the CIA to tell us who won the election ?
Are we supposed to trust that this cellphone spyware wo n't make it into the wrong hands ?
I love computers , but computer and cell phone voting are extremely dangerous to democracy .
Even if it 's not happening in your area , It 's a great danger to the entire country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do these election officials realize that law enforcement has an array of software available to secretly take control of cell phones?
They use it to turn the microphone on so they can listen in on what's being said in the room.
The software keeps the display and power lights off so the target doesn't even know the cell phone is listening in.
The only way to stop this is to remove the battery from the phone.
Should we just trust the CIA to tell us who won the election?
Are we supposed to trust that this cellphone spyware won't make it into the wrong hands?
I love computers, but computer and cell phone voting are extremely dangerous to democracy.
Even if it's not happening in your area, It's a great danger to the entire country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144417</id>
	<title>Not Necessarily Attributable to New System</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1243594200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recall reading an article in the local paper that voter turnout dropped hugely in the most recent California elections. I also recall reading a similar article the next day in the LA Times how voter turnout in LA County also dropped hugely. The whole voter turnout decreasing trend seems to be fairly common throughout the United States these days. Couple that with the ever-popular 'tea party protests' that we have recently seen in the country in which numerous voters are conglomerating and denouncing the government system as a whole and I think you could make a pretty strong case that the drop in the number of votes/voters is not attributable solely to the use of electronic voting instruments. I don't doubt it has had some, and likely even a significant, effect. But I think it would be worth noting that Americans in general seem to have gotten tired of voting. After all, why bother casting a vote when every single candidate elected seems to participate in a general, "who can suck the most" contest. I don't encourage apathy in the populace, but maybe we could try implementing some election system reforms like a, "Choose to withhold my vote from all available candidates" box on ballots. That way we could at least declaratively (yes, I think I made that word up) say that we don't like any of the choices, rather than just not voting and having 'experts' debate the causes of such apathy....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall reading an article in the local paper that voter turnout dropped hugely in the most recent California elections .
I also recall reading a similar article the next day in the LA Times how voter turnout in LA County also dropped hugely .
The whole voter turnout decreasing trend seems to be fairly common throughout the United States these days .
Couple that with the ever-popular 'tea party protests ' that we have recently seen in the country in which numerous voters are conglomerating and denouncing the government system as a whole and I think you could make a pretty strong case that the drop in the number of votes/voters is not attributable solely to the use of electronic voting instruments .
I do n't doubt it has had some , and likely even a significant , effect .
But I think it would be worth noting that Americans in general seem to have gotten tired of voting .
After all , why bother casting a vote when every single candidate elected seems to participate in a general , " who can suck the most " contest .
I do n't encourage apathy in the populace , but maybe we could try implementing some election system reforms like a , " Choose to withhold my vote from all available candidates " box on ballots .
That way we could at least declaratively ( yes , I think I made that word up ) say that we do n't like any of the choices , rather than just not voting and having 'experts ' debate the causes of such apathy... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall reading an article in the local paper that voter turnout dropped hugely in the most recent California elections.
I also recall reading a similar article the next day in the LA Times how voter turnout in LA County also dropped hugely.
The whole voter turnout decreasing trend seems to be fairly common throughout the United States these days.
Couple that with the ever-popular 'tea party protests' that we have recently seen in the country in which numerous voters are conglomerating and denouncing the government system as a whole and I think you could make a pretty strong case that the drop in the number of votes/voters is not attributable solely to the use of electronic voting instruments.
I don't doubt it has had some, and likely even a significant, effect.
But I think it would be worth noting that Americans in general seem to have gotten tired of voting.
After all, why bother casting a vote when every single candidate elected seems to participate in a general, "who can suck the most" contest.
I don't encourage apathy in the populace, but maybe we could try implementing some election system reforms like a, "Choose to withhold my vote from all available candidates" box on ballots.
That way we could at least declaratively (yes, I think I made that word up) say that we don't like any of the choices, rather than just not voting and having 'experts' debate the causes of such apathy....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143977</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Jurily</author>
	<datestamp>1243591980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.</p></div><p>Not to mention the candidates. However, it poses one significant abuse vector: you can't predict the number of votes by counting the people who show up anymore.</p><p>How do we know there weren't more votes for the losing candidate?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.Not to mention the candidates .
However , it poses one significant abuse vector : you ca n't predict the number of votes by counting the people who show up anymore.How do we know there were n't more votes for the losing candidate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.Not to mention the candidates.
However, it poses one significant abuse vector: you can't predict the number of votes by counting the people who show up anymore.How do we know there weren't more votes for the losing candidate?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146797</id>
	<title>Perhaps it wasn't the nature of the voting...</title>
	<author>Socks of Doom</author>
	<datestamp>1243614540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a resident of Oahu (and by that a citizen of the city and county of Honolulu,) I only vaguely remember hearing that there was an election at all, and everything I heard about it would be that applicable voters would receive vote-by-mail cards.

Upon asking four coworkers around me, none of them had known that there even was an election. It might be that we're just cooped up in a lab, but I think the problem was the failure to get the word out this year, not the method of voting.

Also, the election was for the city's "Neighborhood Board" election. I have a hard time believing that the people that DID know could give a rat's ass, considering Hawaii's voter turnout percentiles for major elections.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a resident of Oahu ( and by that a citizen of the city and county of Honolulu , ) I only vaguely remember hearing that there was an election at all , and everything I heard about it would be that applicable voters would receive vote-by-mail cards .
Upon asking four coworkers around me , none of them had known that there even was an election .
It might be that we 're just cooped up in a lab , but I think the problem was the failure to get the word out this year , not the method of voting .
Also , the election was for the city 's " Neighborhood Board " election .
I have a hard time believing that the people that DID know could give a rat 's ass , considering Hawaii 's voter turnout percentiles for major elections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a resident of Oahu (and by that a citizen of the city and county of Honolulu,) I only vaguely remember hearing that there was an election at all, and everything I heard about it would be that applicable voters would receive vote-by-mail cards.
Upon asking four coworkers around me, none of them had known that there even was an election.
It might be that we're just cooped up in a lab, but I think the problem was the failure to get the word out this year, not the method of voting.
Also, the election was for the city's "Neighborhood Board" election.
I have a hard time believing that the people that DID know could give a rat's ass, considering Hawaii's voter turnout percentiles for major elections.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143925</id>
	<title>Social Disconnect</title>
	<author>Celeste R</author>
	<datestamp>1243591860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technology brings us many things, but we lose things in the process.  Take for example, before TV, people were much more social.</p><p>By removing an actual place to vote, the mental association of a "voting place" is removed.  That doesn't mean that e-voting is bad, it just means that there's a ways to go before it works as well as paper voting does.</p><p>The best cure for this "problem" is to link e-voting with traditionally paper voting locations.  Smooth transitions are best, and not transitions that are all or nothing.</p><p>Mental inertia is a force to be understood and accounted for, not shrugged off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technology brings us many things , but we lose things in the process .
Take for example , before TV , people were much more social.By removing an actual place to vote , the mental association of a " voting place " is removed .
That does n't mean that e-voting is bad , it just means that there 's a ways to go before it works as well as paper voting does.The best cure for this " problem " is to link e-voting with traditionally paper voting locations .
Smooth transitions are best , and not transitions that are all or nothing.Mental inertia is a force to be understood and accounted for , not shrugged off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technology brings us many things, but we lose things in the process.
Take for example, before TV, people were much more social.By removing an actual place to vote, the mental association of a "voting place" is removed.
That doesn't mean that e-voting is bad, it just means that there's a ways to go before it works as well as paper voting does.The best cure for this "problem" is to link e-voting with traditionally paper voting locations.
Smooth transitions are best, and not transitions that are all or nothing.Mental inertia is a force to be understood and accounted for, not shrugged off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151105</id>
	<title>Re:no paper = no vote!</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1243713360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also,<br>you do know that paper is flammable, I presume. In the country of my great repeatedly elected<br>supreme leader, we know this very well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also,you do know that paper is flammable , I presume .
In the country of my great repeatedly electedsupreme leader , we know this very well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also,you do know that paper is flammable, I presume.
In the country of my great repeatedly electedsupreme leader, we know this very well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144441</id>
	<title>presidential election</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243594320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>last year was a presidential election,
that surely affects the numbers</htmltext>
<tokenext>last year was a presidential election , that surely affects the numbers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>last year was a presidential election,
that surely affects the numbers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143879</id>
	<title>Not prepared at all</title>
	<author>nickdc</author>
	<datestamp>1243591620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately this is really bad for the propagating of voting technology. They definitely needed to be more prepared before adopting this method.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately this is really bad for the propagating of voting technology .
They definitely needed to be more prepared before adopting this method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately this is really bad for the propagating of voting technology.
They definitely needed to be more prepared before adopting this method.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143855</id>
	<title>Don't feel too bad.</title>
	<author>MindlessAutomata</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a real big loss. After all, democracy doesn't really work anyway, just like all those other systems of government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a real big loss .
After all , democracy does n't really work anyway , just like all those other systems of government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a real big loss.
After all, democracy doesn't really work anyway, just like all those other systems of government.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144083</id>
	<title>Re:Elderly don't use computers.</title>
	<author>areusche</author>
	<datestamp>1243592400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a 7th grade teacher who was staunchly conservative. Mind you she couldn't use a computer very well. This might not be such a bad thing...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a 7th grade teacher who was staunchly conservative .
Mind you she could n't use a computer very well .
This might not be such a bad thing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a 7th grade teacher who was staunchly conservative.
Mind you she couldn't use a computer very well.
This might not be such a bad thing...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869</id>
	<title>Elderly don't use computers.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243591620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The elderly are the largest voting population and few of them own a computer nevertheless know how to use one. They pretty much didn't allow a majority of voters vote because they didn't know how.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The elderly are the largest voting population and few of them own a computer nevertheless know how to use one .
They pretty much did n't allow a majority of voters vote because they did n't know how .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The elderly are the largest voting population and few of them own a computer nevertheless know how to use one.
They pretty much didn't allow a majority of voters vote because they didn't know how.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152991</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>gurps\_npc</author>
	<datestamp>1243681800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, lets disenfranchise all the idiots so poor that neither their parents nor their state provided school in the middle of a ghetto owns any computers.

<p>If YOU were smart enough to know your history you would know about the multiple intelligence tests that certain southern gentleman used to keep blacks from voting.
</p><p>Whats more, intelligence is not helpful in democracy.   There is no way you can make the right decision by voting on it.  Democracy is about FRANCHISING people - giving them power, not about making the right decisions.  The side effects of spreading the power - decreasing the odds of a civil and increasing the factors considered by the powers that be - are far more important than the rather unimportant benefit of a smarter electorate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , lets disenfranchise all the idiots so poor that neither their parents nor their state provided school in the middle of a ghetto owns any computers .
If YOU were smart enough to know your history you would know about the multiple intelligence tests that certain southern gentleman used to keep blacks from voting .
Whats more , intelligence is not helpful in democracy .
There is no way you can make the right decision by voting on it .
Democracy is about FRANCHISING people - giving them power , not about making the right decisions .
The side effects of spreading the power - decreasing the odds of a civil and increasing the factors considered by the powers that be - are far more important than the rather unimportant benefit of a smarter electorate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, lets disenfranchise all the idiots so poor that neither their parents nor their state provided school in the middle of a ghetto owns any computers.
If YOU were smart enough to know your history you would know about the multiple intelligence tests that certain southern gentleman used to keep blacks from voting.
Whats more, intelligence is not helpful in democracy.
There is no way you can make the right decision by voting on it.
Democracy is about FRANCHISING people - giving them power, not about making the right decisions.
The side effects of spreading the power - decreasing the odds of a civil and increasing the factors considered by the powers that be - are far more important than the rather unimportant benefit of a smarter electorate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144435</id>
	<title>By coincidence</title>
	<author>Cajun Hell</author>
	<datestamp>1243594260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another study showed that 17\% of voters had no fingers, thus can't do anything digitally.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another study showed that 17 \ % of voters had no fingers , thus ca n't do anything digitally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another study showed that 17\% of voters had no fingers, thus can't do anything digitally.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144257</id>
	<title>There are other reasons.</title>
	<author>Nsmokg</author>
	<datestamp>1243593360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anybody think that the drop in voters might be because of the lack of a presidential election.  There is always a huge difference in the voter turn out when the election is in an off year.  Now to compare it correctly you would have to wait till the next pres. election and see what the turn out is to get the correct numbers on how electronic voting is going.  For the nay sayers, this was a great year for it.  The stats prove it, but not really.  The lack of numbers shows it is because of the lack of a pres. election.
-
-

"If you chose not to decide, you still have made a choice."  Rush</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anybody think that the drop in voters might be because of the lack of a presidential election .
There is always a huge difference in the voter turn out when the election is in an off year .
Now to compare it correctly you would have to wait till the next pres .
election and see what the turn out is to get the correct numbers on how electronic voting is going .
For the nay sayers , this was a great year for it .
The stats prove it , but not really .
The lack of numbers shows it is because of the lack of a pres .
election . - - " If you chose not to decide , you still have made a choice .
" Rush</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anybody think that the drop in voters might be because of the lack of a presidential election.
There is always a huge difference in the voter turn out when the election is in an off year.
Now to compare it correctly you would have to wait till the next pres.
election and see what the turn out is to get the correct numbers on how electronic voting is going.
For the nay sayers, this was a great year for it.
The stats prove it, but not really.
The lack of numbers shows it is because of the lack of a pres.
election.
-
-

"If you chose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
"  Rush</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146297</id>
	<title>Re:look, morons:</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1243608060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The for small, local elections it may not matter that much other than standardization.</p><p>The real problem is speedy results.  People in the US think of elections as a some kind of a race.  A race with a winner and a loser where the results are available at the end of the race.  In the case where results aren't available immediately, the TV News people are going to make up results based on exit polls and other information.  This was done when Gore was announced around midnight in 2000.  Of course, these were not official results, but that didn't matter all that much to people because they went to bed.</p><p>Without speedy results, we are turning over the elections to the TV News folks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The for small , local elections it may not matter that much other than standardization.The real problem is speedy results .
People in the US think of elections as a some kind of a race .
A race with a winner and a loser where the results are available at the end of the race .
In the case where results are n't available immediately , the TV News people are going to make up results based on exit polls and other information .
This was done when Gore was announced around midnight in 2000 .
Of course , these were not official results , but that did n't matter all that much to people because they went to bed.Without speedy results , we are turning over the elections to the TV News folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The for small, local elections it may not matter that much other than standardization.The real problem is speedy results.
People in the US think of elections as a some kind of a race.
A race with a winner and a loser where the results are available at the end of the race.
In the case where results aren't available immediately, the TV News people are going to make up results based on exit polls and other information.
This was done when Gore was announced around midnight in 2000.
Of course, these were not official results, but that didn't matter all that much to people because they went to bed.Without speedy results, we are turning over the elections to the TV News folks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151137</id>
	<title>Re:no paper = no vote!</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1243713600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With money, I don't go in for all this debit-card, credit card, bank account nonsense.<br>Complete hocus-pocus.<br>In fact, I don't even hold with paper notes.<br>If it isn't solid metal weighing and clanking in my pocket,<br>I don't trust it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With money , I do n't go in for all this debit-card , credit card , bank account nonsense.Complete hocus-pocus.In fact , I do n't even hold with paper notes.If it is n't solid metal weighing and clanking in my pocket,I do n't trust it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With money, I don't go in for all this debit-card, credit card, bank account nonsense.Complete hocus-pocus.In fact, I don't even hold with paper notes.If it isn't solid metal weighing and clanking in my pocket,I don't trust it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147177</id>
	<title>Re:I live on Oahu</title>
	<author>BifurcatedFocus</author>
	<datestamp>1243618860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.</p></div><p>Perhaps their mistake was that their advertising wasn't as innovative as the balloting.  Next time they can spend their advertising budget in Second Life, perhaps buying their own "Election Island" where voters' avatars can encounter virtual voter information while enjoying visiting replicas of actual places on Oahu painstakingly recreated with prims, textures and scripts.  Surely if anything could replace the community spirit of a busy polling place at election day it would be the virtual community spirit created by avatars wandering around an an eerie, abandoned, ghost town-like virtual world while waiting for billboard textures to load so they can learn about the candidates.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place , and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.Perhaps their mistake was that their advertising was n't as innovative as the balloting .
Next time they can spend their advertising budget in Second Life , perhaps buying their own " Election Island " where voters ' avatars can encounter virtual voter information while enjoying visiting replicas of actual places on Oahu painstakingly recreated with prims , textures and scripts .
Surely if anything could replace the community spirit of a busy polling place at election day it would be the virtual community spirit created by avatars wandering around an an eerie , abandoned , ghost town-like virtual world while waiting for billboard textures to load so they can learn about the candidates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.Perhaps their mistake was that their advertising wasn't as innovative as the balloting.
Next time they can spend their advertising budget in Second Life, perhaps buying their own "Election Island" where voters' avatars can encounter virtual voter information while enjoying visiting replicas of actual places on Oahu painstakingly recreated with prims, textures and scripts.
Surely if anything could replace the community spirit of a busy polling place at election day it would be the virtual community spirit created by avatars wandering around an an eerie, abandoned, ghost town-like virtual world while waiting for billboard textures to load so they can learn about the candidates.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144319</id>
	<title>No paper trail...</title>
	<author>Temujin\_12</author>
	<datestamp>1243593600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of.</p></div><p>Then what makes them so certain that there were only 7,300 people who voted?</p><p>A paper trail is SUPPOSED to have a certain level of inconvenience. That's part of its value.  Generally speaking, the more automation a voting system has, the higher the potential for fraud.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of.Then what makes them so certain that there were only 7,300 people who voted ? A paper trail is SUPPOSED to have a certain level of inconvenience .
That 's part of its value .
Generally speaking , the more automation a voting system has , the higher the potential for fraud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the first time there is no paper ballot to speak of.Then what makes them so certain that there were only 7,300 people who voted?A paper trail is SUPPOSED to have a certain level of inconvenience.
That's part of its value.
Generally speaking, the more automation a voting system has, the higher the potential for fraud.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145667</id>
	<title>Intelligence has nothing to do with it...</title>
	<author>msauve</author>
	<datestamp>1243602240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why should someone have to pay for technology in order to vote?<br> <br>I (and you, apparently) am fortunate enough to have both phone and Internet access, but there are many citizens who don't. Homeless people have the right to vote, too, without having to seek out some technological proxy.<br> <br>If this ever hits my area, I'll look forward to writing off my Internet access and computer costs when I do my taxes.<br> <br>Finally, if you're "intelligent" enough to hang around<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., you should already be aware of all the security implications involved with voting-by-wire.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should someone have to pay for technology in order to vote ?
I ( and you , apparently ) am fortunate enough to have both phone and Internet access , but there are many citizens who do n't .
Homeless people have the right to vote , too , without having to seek out some technological proxy .
If this ever hits my area , I 'll look forward to writing off my Internet access and computer costs when I do my taxes .
Finally , if you 're " intelligent " enough to hang around /. , you should already be aware of all the security implications involved with voting-by-wire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should someone have to pay for technology in order to vote?
I (and you, apparently) am fortunate enough to have both phone and Internet access, but there are many citizens who don't.
Homeless people have the right to vote, too, without having to seek out some technological proxy.
If this ever hits my area, I'll look forward to writing off my Internet access and computer costs when I do my taxes.
Finally, if you're "intelligent" enough to hang around /., you should already be aware of all the security implications involved with voting-by-wire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991</id>
	<title>I live on Oahu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243597440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>And this is the first I've heard of this election. I had no idea this was happening. My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And this is the first I 've heard of this election .
I had no idea this was happening .
My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place , and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this is the first I've heard of this election.
I had no idea this was happening.
My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144037</id>
	<title>Who cooked up this scheme?</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1243592220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The city cut its expenses in half by using computers and phone technology by Everyone Counts.</p><p>"This is the future for presidential elections, general elections, primary elections, all the way," Everyone Counts consultant Bob Watada said.<br>Watada is the former Campaign Spending Commission director.</p><p>Whoa!  Conflict of interest much?</p><p>1) Con city into using Company A<br>2) Sign fat contract with Company A<br>3) Hold election (sweep massive FAIL under rug)<br>4) Profit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The city cut its expenses in half by using computers and phone technology by Everyone Counts .
" This is the future for presidential elections , general elections , primary elections , all the way , " Everyone Counts consultant Bob Watada said.Watada is the former Campaign Spending Commission director.Whoa !
Conflict of interest much ? 1 ) Con city into using Company A2 ) Sign fat contract with Company A3 ) Hold election ( sweep massive FAIL under rug ) 4 ) Profit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The city cut its expenses in half by using computers and phone technology by Everyone Counts.
"This is the future for presidential elections, general elections, primary elections, all the way," Everyone Counts consultant Bob Watada said.Watada is the former Campaign Spending Commission director.Whoa!
Conflict of interest much?1) Con city into using Company A2) Sign fat contract with Company A3) Hold election (sweep massive FAIL under rug)4) Profit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143913</id>
	<title>Money means nothing...</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1243591800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... when your Democracy has no physical accountability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... when your Democracy has no physical accountability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... when your Democracy has no physical accountability.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143853</id>
	<title>You're Doing It Wrong</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people the previous year, a drop of about 83 percent.</p></div><p>If all you're concerned about is number of votes, put each candidate on prime time television belting out the worst songs they can think of.  Then instruct viewers to vote with their cell phones.  Don't forget to charge them 99 cents a call and limit them to 10 votes<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the populace seems to <i>love</i> that.  <br> <br>

Granted, they might not be the best candidate for the position, there will be 10 million votes and you'll have a $9.9 million surplus to decide what to do with.  On top of that, your elected official will be able to sing "Oops, I Did It Again" by Britney Spears whenever they screw anything up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>7,300 people voted this year , compared to 44,000 people the previous year , a drop of about 83 percent.If all you 're concerned about is number of votes , put each candidate on prime time television belting out the worst songs they can think of .
Then instruct viewers to vote with their cell phones .
Do n't forget to charge them 99 cents a call and limit them to 10 votes ... the populace seems to love that .
Granted , they might not be the best candidate for the position , there will be 10 million votes and you 'll have a $ 9.9 million surplus to decide what to do with .
On top of that , your elected official will be able to sing " Oops , I Did It Again " by Britney Spears whenever they screw anything up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>7,300 people voted this year, compared to 44,000 people the previous year, a drop of about 83 percent.If all you're concerned about is number of votes, put each candidate on prime time television belting out the worst songs they can think of.
Then instruct viewers to vote with their cell phones.
Don't forget to charge them 99 cents a call and limit them to 10 votes ... the populace seems to love that.
Granted, they might not be the best candidate for the position, there will be 10 million votes and you'll have a $9.9 million surplus to decide what to do with.
On top of that, your elected official will be able to sing "Oops, I Did It Again" by Britney Spears whenever they screw anything up.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144243</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother when you know its hacked?</title>
	<author>konigstein</author>
	<datestamp>1243593300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is so easily hackable as to be laughable. The only reason no one has capitalized on this is because there is no clear way to capitalize on this without being traced. I'd say ACORN has proven paper voter registration, Illegal immigrant, and other "ghost" voting so easily done that either electronic AND paper voting is laughable until we have something that is unique to each person to identify them, at which point we can accurately tally their votes. Unfortunately, once we do that we open all kinds of other cans of worms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is so easily hackable as to be laughable .
The only reason no one has capitalized on this is because there is no clear way to capitalize on this without being traced .
I 'd say ACORN has proven paper voter registration , Illegal immigrant , and other " ghost " voting so easily done that either electronic AND paper voting is laughable until we have something that is unique to each person to identify them , at which point we can accurately tally their votes .
Unfortunately , once we do that we open all kinds of other cans of worms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is so easily hackable as to be laughable.
The only reason no one has capitalized on this is because there is no clear way to capitalize on this without being traced.
I'd say ACORN has proven paper voter registration, Illegal immigrant, and other "ghost" voting so easily done that either electronic AND paper voting is laughable until we have something that is unique to each person to identify them, at which point we can accurately tally their votes.
Unfortunately, once we do that we open all kinds of other cans of worms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143931</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144081</id>
	<title>Quite the opposite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243592400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.. TFS says they were allowing voting by phone.  Personally, I'd like to see them discount anything coming in from your typical slack-jawed cellphone addicted cretin.  Either that or require them to enter the whole name of the candidate to get rid of the lol crowd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.. TFS says they were allowing voting by phone .
Personally , I 'd like to see them discount anything coming in from your typical slack-jawed cellphone addicted cretin .
Either that or require them to enter the whole name of the candidate to get rid of the lol crowd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. TFS says they were allowing voting by phone.
Personally, I'd like to see them discount anything coming in from your typical slack-jawed cellphone addicted cretin.
Either that or require them to enter the whole name of the candidate to get rid of the lol crowd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243591560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>We need more all-digital elections. I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need more all-digital elections .
I do n't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need more all-digital elections.
I don't trust people who are not intelligent enough to use a computer to be informed enough to vote in my jurisdiction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144313</id>
	<title>Re:Elderly don't use computers.</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1243593600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You missed the part of TFA that provided Telephone Voting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You missed the part of TFA that provided Telephone Voting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You missed the part of TFA that provided Telephone Voting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147249</id>
	<title>Re:No faith</title>
	<author>SanityInAnarchy</author>
	<datestamp>1243620360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That, or there actually was an error in the results... maybe 83\% of the votes were thrown away?</p><p>Unlikely, but I'm just saying...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That , or there actually was an error in the results... maybe 83 \ % of the votes were thrown away ? Unlikely , but I 'm just saying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That, or there actually was an error in the results... maybe 83\% of the votes were thrown away?Unlikely, but I'm just saying...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307</id>
	<title>no paper = no vote!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243621320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a computer scientist, PhD, and if I had to vote electronically for the elections I would disobey the law (elections aren't optional in Europe and failure to appear is punishable with one or two years in prison): I would refuse to cast a vote, because as a computer scientist I know very well how computers (don't) work, especially when under the control of vested interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a computer scientist , PhD , and if I had to vote electronically for the elections I would disobey the law ( elections are n't optional in Europe and failure to appear is punishable with one or two years in prison ) : I would refuse to cast a vote , because as a computer scientist I know very well how computers ( do n't ) work , especially when under the control of vested interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a computer scientist, PhD, and if I had to vote electronically for the elections I would disobey the law (elections aren't optional in Europe and failure to appear is punishable with one or two years in prison): I would refuse to cast a vote, because as a computer scientist I know very well how computers (don't) work, especially when under the control of vested interests.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144661</id>
	<title>Re:Don't feel too bad.</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1243595520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually Totalitarians run a pretty good Gov't system. Too bad about the whole equal rights thing and the way Democracies love to liberate people and stuff. I mean hey, that Stalin guy was a bit of a dick but don't nobody say he didn't know how to run a country.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually Totalitarians run a pretty good Gov't system .
Too bad about the whole equal rights thing and the way Democracies love to liberate people and stuff .
I mean hey , that Stalin guy was a bit of a dick but do n't nobody say he did n't know how to run a country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually Totalitarians run a pretty good Gov't system.
Too bad about the whole equal rights thing and the way Democracies love to liberate people and stuff.
I mean hey, that Stalin guy was a bit of a dick but don't nobody say he didn't know how to run a country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143899</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>EdZ</author>
	<datestamp>1243591740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It sounds great, until you realise that the system will likely be about as secure as a wet paper bag. Or that ballot-stuffing is now easier for, say, 4chan.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds great , until you realise that the system will likely be about as secure as a wet paper bag .
Or that ballot-stuffing is now easier for , say , 4chan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds great, until you realise that the system will likely be about as secure as a wet paper bag.
Or that ballot-stuffing is now easier for, say, 4chan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28167067</id>
	<title>Re:look, morons:</title>
	<author>2obvious4u</author>
	<datestamp>1243866840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why the hate on electronic records?</p><p>Here is a tamper proof way to do electronic voting:</p><p>1. Everyone already has a voter registration number, make sure they know it.<br>2. Decentralize the vote.  Each "polling station" creates a flat file that has the voter id and what they voted for.  Make it available for anyone to download.<br>3. Next have a regional/district "polling station" where the flat file is uploaded.  The flat file is audited again here.  Also the aggregate file is also made available to the public.<br>4. Continue the pooling of votes to whatever level is needed, national, global, whatever.</p><p>There are so many checks on the system that I would argue that it would be harder to tamper than with closed door paper ballots, where once my vote is cast I can't verify that that is the vote that is still counted.  At least this way I could download my local election flat file, verify my voter id / ballot matches and tally the votes myself in a spreadsheet.</p><p>Billions of dollars are moved electronically every day.  If our money can be moved electronically why not our votes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the hate on electronic records ? Here is a tamper proof way to do electronic voting : 1 .
Everyone already has a voter registration number , make sure they know it.2 .
Decentralize the vote .
Each " polling station " creates a flat file that has the voter id and what they voted for .
Make it available for anyone to download.3 .
Next have a regional/district " polling station " where the flat file is uploaded .
The flat file is audited again here .
Also the aggregate file is also made available to the public.4 .
Continue the pooling of votes to whatever level is needed , national , global , whatever.There are so many checks on the system that I would argue that it would be harder to tamper than with closed door paper ballots , where once my vote is cast I ca n't verify that that is the vote that is still counted .
At least this way I could download my local election flat file , verify my voter id / ballot matches and tally the votes myself in a spreadsheet.Billions of dollars are moved electronically every day .
If our money can be moved electronically why not our votes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the hate on electronic records?Here is a tamper proof way to do electronic voting:1.
Everyone already has a voter registration number, make sure they know it.2.
Decentralize the vote.
Each "polling station" creates a flat file that has the voter id and what they voted for.
Make it available for anyone to download.3.
Next have a regional/district "polling station" where the flat file is uploaded.
The flat file is audited again here.
Also the aggregate file is also made available to the public.4.
Continue the pooling of votes to whatever level is needed, national, global, whatever.There are so many checks on the system that I would argue that it would be harder to tamper than with closed door paper ballots, where once my vote is cast I can't verify that that is the vote that is still counted.
At least this way I could download my local election flat file, verify my voter id / ballot matches and tally the votes myself in a spreadsheet.Billions of dollars are moved electronically every day.
If our money can be moved electronically why not our votes?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144561</id>
	<title>Re:Way of the future - Get used to it</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1243594980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with Democracy on a massive scale is that because the rest of the country outnumbers the amount of people you know - you can't be sure that your vote is either A) Properly being counted or B) Worth it at all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Democracy on a massive scale is that because the rest of the country outnumbers the amount of people you know - you ca n't be sure that your vote is either A ) Properly being counted or B ) Worth it at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Democracy on a massive scale is that because the rest of the country outnumbers the amount of people you know - you can't be sure that your vote is either A) Properly being counted or B) Worth it at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146915</id>
	<title>Re:I live on Oahu</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1243616040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And this is the first I've heard of this election. I had no idea this was happening. My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.</p></div><p>That would make sense except that this election happens every year. Are you saying that the people who voted in this election last year didn't know they were going to have it this year?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And this is the first I 've heard of this election .
I had no idea this was happening .
My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place , and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.That would make sense except that this election happens every year .
Are you saying that the people who voted in this election last year did n't know they were going to have it this year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this is the first I've heard of this election.
I had no idea this was happening.
My guess is that too few people knew about the election in the first place, and that it was just a failure to advertise it properly.That would make sense except that this election happens every year.
Are you saying that the people who voted in this election last year didn't know they were going to have it this year?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146897</id>
	<title>Re:We could fix Social Security and Medicare...</title>
	<author>mog007</author>
	<datestamp>1243615860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about the guy who cuts spending AND cuts taxes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the guy who cuts spending AND cuts taxes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the guy who cuts spending AND cuts taxes?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144351</id>
	<title>How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243593840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe the software undercounted by 83 percent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe the software undercounted by 83 percent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe the software undercounted by 83 percent.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865</id>
	<title>What were the reasons?</title>
	<author>Daetrin</author>
	<datestamp>1243591620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did they do any polling or anything to figure out why that was? Were people just not able to figure out electronic voting? If so the problem should go away after a couple election cycles. It would be more worrisome if there's some kind of innate apathy to a voting process that doesn't involve getting out of the house and doing something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did they do any polling or anything to figure out why that was ?
Were people just not able to figure out electronic voting ?
If so the problem should go away after a couple election cycles .
It would be more worrisome if there 's some kind of innate apathy to a voting process that does n't involve getting out of the house and doing something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did they do any polling or anything to figure out why that was?
Were people just not able to figure out electronic voting?
If so the problem should go away after a couple election cycles.
It would be more worrisome if there's some kind of innate apathy to a voting process that doesn't involve getting out of the house and doing something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145431</id>
	<title>the other 36700 did vote</title>
	<author>bugs2squash</author>
	<datestamp>1243600440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They voted against the voting system...<p>Besides, what respectable electronic voting system for Oahu (population 900,000) would not register at least 1,200,000 votes ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They voted against the voting system...Besides , what respectable electronic voting system for Oahu ( population 900,000 ) would not register at least 1,200,000 votes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They voted against the voting system...Besides, what respectable electronic voting system for Oahu (population 900,000) would not register at least 1,200,000 votes ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144933</id>
	<title>If I were a resident of Oahu..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243597140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would consider this change to be so drastic that I would demand an investigation to determine if this vote was fair and accurate.  Dropping some?  Ok, fair enough.  But saving half the money to get what, 1/6 of the votes?</p><p>Not a savings at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would consider this change to be so drastic that I would demand an investigation to determine if this vote was fair and accurate .
Dropping some ?
Ok , fair enough .
But saving half the money to get what , 1/6 of the votes ? Not a savings at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would consider this change to be so drastic that I would demand an investigation to determine if this vote was fair and accurate.
Dropping some?
Ok, fair enough.
But saving half the money to get what, 1/6 of the votes?Not a savings at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144081
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144313
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28167067
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147947
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28148981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147249
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147511
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147303
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144501
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_29_1816257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147177
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146915
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143917
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146797
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143843
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143899
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28152991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143977
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143869
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144083
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144441
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143865
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147947
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28148981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145967
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28151105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144075
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143931
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144243
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144501
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143879
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143859
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144407
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147249
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28145135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144037
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28143853
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144379
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28147303
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144257
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_29_1816257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28144515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28146297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_29_1816257.28167067
</commentlist>
</conversation>
