<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2745.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#000080>Ralf, (and
everybody)</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#000080>Thanks so much. I do appreciate your
patience with my inexperience and ignorance. I will work with Robert on shaping
up this theme proposal.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080>Could this issue be called Privacy and
Security of e-Voting, not just privacy, so that it includes transparency and
integrity of the voting process as well?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080>Saludos, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080>Ginger</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080><FONT color=#000000>Ginger,<BR><BR>> I know I am
sounding like a broken record, but I need to replay it: <BR>> e-voting is an
issue that is not being adequately attended. <BR>(..)<BR>> The Human Rights
Caucus feels that this is too specific an issue to deal <BR>> with, and that
it is more appropriately a privacy and security issue.<BR>Which is correct, I'd
say. We (as in PrivSec WG) have already supported <BR>this issue before, so we
naturally are the patron for this issue.<BR><BR>> Would somebody please take
the time to explain to me why I am in such a <BR>> minority on this point?
What am I missing?<BR>You are not. Your theme proposal on the privacy of voting
has already been <BR>written and has my full support. (I'll re-post it to this
list in a minute).<BR>I just noticed it is not yet listed at <BR></FONT><A
href="http://www.writely.com/Doc.aspx?id=bbfcskzpsx44x">http://www.writely.com/Doc.aspx?id=bbfcskzpsx44x</A><FONT
color=#000000>. This might be because <BR>the fields in the proposal don't have
content yet: "Mandate, Main actors, <BR>Priority for treatment in the first
annual meeting". You can not expect <BR>Robert Guerra to re-write it for you (or
us).<BR><BR>I was asking for a different theme proposal, following up on the
"Global <BR>Privacy Forum" proposal this Working Group had already submitted in
<BR>February (I think before you joined the us). If we want to be taken
<BR>seriously, we should to do some follow-up on this, especially as it has
<BR>gathered significant support in the data protecxtion commissioners'
<BR>community. But this piece still needs to be written completely.<BR><BR>Then
in the end, we as PrivSec WG can support three proposals, which is <BR>what the
IGF secretariat is asking for:<BR>- Digital Identiy<BR>- Privacy of
e-Voting<BR>- Global Privacy Forum<BR><BR>Is this ok for everybody?<BR><BR>Best,
Ralf</FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>