Idiocy will not be tolerated in this list. You have been warned boy.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, and it's square. > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Oscar Plameras > <[email protected]> wrote: >> And the earth is flat. >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Paolo Falcone <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Source code review will never be tolerated.Not as a method for acceptance >>>> testing in Software Engineering. >>>> >>> >>> Peddle that myth to the makers of Crucible + Fisheye, Bazaar, Google, >>> etc. And watch the sky go crashing that you're plainly, misguidedly, >>> wrong. >>> >>>> Where in the world is that happening when you simply want to know that what >>>> you entered is religously recorded and is not corrupted? >>>> >>>> Only in Pinas, I guess. >>> >>> And a host of other countries too. >>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Paolo Falcone <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Comelec can't release the source code. They don't have the source codes. >>>>>> That's clear enough. >>>>> >>>>> But they're the only ones that can instruct Smartmatic to release the >>>>> source code. To be fair, there are fellow PLUGgers in Smartmatic. Even >>>>> if we exercise our connections there, we cannot legally do it since >>>>> that is just against the rules. >>>>> >>>>> Heck, will you just believe us if we ask our Smartmatic counterparts >>>>> and they say there are no backdoors? Trust yet verify. This is a >>>>> procedure that we must adhere to. >>>>> >>>>>> Even if Comelec can't release the source code, it does not mean the end >>>>>> of >>>>>> the Auteomatic Election System. A portion of the contract may be invalid >>>>>> in view of the law, but the entire contract covering the business >>>>>> transactions >>>>>> between Comelec and Smatmatic may not be invalidated. That's how this >>>>>> contract are done. A single provision that's not complied with is not a >>>>>> justification to invalidate a contract. And that's true in this >>>>>> situation. >>>>> >>>>> True. No one is calling for the death of the automated election >>>>> system. The death referred to here is the death of the source code >>>>> review (read the subject please!). That death is something that we >>>>> DONT want to happen. >>>>> >>>>>> But we are "forking" away from the substance of our discussion, namely, >>>>>> that people in this group are keen to see source code review. The point >>>>>> is that it is not the efficient way to do acceptance testing of the >>>>>> system. >>>>>> In fact, it is the most difficult way and is not the way we do it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is the kool-aid that COMELEC wants to sell to everyone that the >>>>> more learned people here do not buy a rat's ass out of. So you mean to >>>>> tell us that government should just violate the law because their >>>>> oh-so-wonderful wisdom tells us it's difficult? >>>>> >>>>> Since when is NOT doing a source code review EQUAL to doing a source >>>>> code review? The fallacies are showing in your arguments man. >>>>> >>>>> COMELEC need not spend a single centavo just to release the source code. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Paolo Falcone <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> The contract isn't being discussed here. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The question is about the provision of the law that is BEING violated >>>>>>> by COMELEC. To wit, the thread started with this proviso: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "On SysTest Labs: It will do a testing of the binary executable. The >>>>>>> testing will be more scientific than the testing done by the Special >>>>>>> Bids and Awards Committee (that awarded the contract to Smartmatic) >>>>>>> but will cost COMELEC more than PHP70 Million. Note that this is >>>>>>> software testing of the binary executable, not a review of the source >>>>>>> code, and the two are totally different "animals". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, October 5, 2009, CenPEG filed with the Supreme Court a >>>>>>> petition for mandamus, asking the Supreme Court to force COMELEC to >>>>>>> release the source code of the election programs that will be used in >>>>>>> May, 2010 to CenPEG and to all interested political parties and >>>>>>> groups, as provided for by law (RA-9369)." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All it takes for COMELEC to comply is just release the source code for >>>>>>> review! Doesn't need a lawyer to interpret source, in fact, lawyers >>>>>>> will just get in the way unless they know how to read programming >>>>>>> source code. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:36 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Sorry, what I mean is that a portion of the contract maybe invalid but >>>>>>>> it does not >>>>>>>> invalidate the entire contract? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I read this law. But do you know that a portion of the law may be >>>>>>>>> invalid but >>>>>>>>> it does not invalidate the entire contract? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Paolo Falcone >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Good grief! Have you been living under a rock? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> RA-9369 Sec 12 mandates these provisions, to wit: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> “Once an AES technology is selected for implementation, the >>>>>>>>>> Commission >>>>>>>>>> shall promptly make the source code of that technology available and >>>>>>>>>> open to any interested political party or groups which may conduct >>>>>>>>>> their own review thereof." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What COMELEC is doing is ILLEGAL. Plain and simple. Welcome to the >>>>>>>>>> reality that even constitutional bodies can do wrong. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Go carry your trolling and one-liners elsewhere boy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> What do you mean by law? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The problem is we are too pedantic. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If only we are a little bit practical, pragmatic, and sensible. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Then, change will come. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> You're right. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You get what you deserve, as they say. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Paolo Falcone >>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> So we're just gonna trade quips and one liners eh? Any two >>>>>>>>>>>>> monkeys can >>>>>>>>>>>>> play that game. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Then again, you still haven't proven that a blackbox test WILL >>>>>>>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>>>>>>> and SATISFY the requirement (BY LAW!) for the source code review. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Or >>>>>>>>>>>>> are you claiming invincible ignorance here? This ain't the forum >>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>> that! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's why we are in a mess. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's a saying when you are in a hole, you stop digging. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's really up to you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Paolo Falcone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Duh? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are conveniently forgetting that the PCOS is not just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Count and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tabulate". It also has features to ensure that the system is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tampered, whether during count or transmission, and that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requires >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crypto. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Horses for courses my ass. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If it were just simple to simply trust governments and people, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't be a need for a military, or for crypto at all. But >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the real world, and not all can be trusted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Horses for courses. Military security is not comparable to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> system that is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Count and Tabulate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Paolo Falcone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The system is indeed not designed to detect corruption, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neither >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does a source code review indicate that with all degrees of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the presence of a backdoor indicates corruption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then again, only a source code review satisfies the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requirement that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there will be no backdoors in the inspected application, be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it put by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a corrupt programmer or a programmer in a hurry to get out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. A blackbox testing with the specifications can only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get you so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far - that the system is compliant as per specification. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whether it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exceeds or subverts the specification outside the test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conditions is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that you can only get with a code review. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anyone even wondered why the military is so anal about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source code >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and algorithm review when designing military ciphers? Once >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> underlying mantra (Kerckhoff's principle) is thoroughly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then one will understand why a blackbox testing SIMPLY DOES >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT DO THE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JOB. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It amazes me that there are still some segments in society >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that won't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extend the same level of scrutiny to the system that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determines who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will run their government. And would rather outsource the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scrutinizing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eyes to some non-stakeholder corporation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When it comes to reviewing software, you can automate all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the tests, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but at the end of the day, NEVER TRUST A MACHINE TO DO A >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HUMAN'S JOB. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You should know that the system is not meant to detect >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corruption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps I should qualify that. Lest the prorammers in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. Hehehe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should at least be realistic enough to note >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt officials are completely willing to corrupting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including programmers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do I trust pogrammers? Not all. Do you? Btw. Let's keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to technical stuff and let us not question each other's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> technical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> capabilities. Peace. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you don't trust programmers, you are in the wrong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> profession. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't trust programmers who hide their code. Although >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewers are honest, all it takes to expose anomalies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in open source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is one honest reviewer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However in a close source system all it takes to corrupt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the system >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one corrupt programmer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2009, at 6:05 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't trust programmers? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This precisely what's wrong with source code review. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Very true. Unfortunately, I do not trust the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> programmers if I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check their work. The purpose of source code >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> validation is not to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check the computer or it's software's trustworthiness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A computer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do what it's told. It is human corruption I'm worried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about. Of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> course >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of computers that is a different problem >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> altogether. I just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't want people blaming computerization for failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What you mean is the trustworthiness of the people >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> system. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll say one thing from my experience, you can't use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the system >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arrest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> human corruption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think I see where you are coming from. It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the system we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worried about sir. It is the trustworthiness of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> system. A >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simple >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exposure of the code will show that it is not doing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ordinary. Besides. If the code is indeed simple >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as you said, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checking the cource code should be easy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Danny Ching >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2009, at 5:26 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A tester does not need to know about programming to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accept >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a System. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:47 PM, fooler mail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Oscar Plameras >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remember, Election Automation Software is one of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the easiest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> develop. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is "Count and Tally", nothing complicated and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convoluted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> true.. BUT... the purpose of source code review is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to examine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is something beyond the count and tally thing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which cannot be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your simulation test.. as what danny said - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TRIGGERS.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special keyboard hotkey, special packets, special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ER and others >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trigger the manipulation of votes to do the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dagdag-bawas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fooler. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>>>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>>>>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>>>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Paolo >>>>>>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Paolo >>>>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>>>> _________________________________________________ >>>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Paolo >>> Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines >>> _________________________________________________ >>> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List >>> http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug >>> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph >> > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph > -- Paolo Sent from Makati, Man, Philippines _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
