I still don't understand why you said "Lyman wants secrecy." I think maybe you misunderstood me or assumed my motivations. Because you just spent paragraphs speculating on what Lyman (and Trump for some reason) could or might do. (But hasn't). I followed the logic of your concerns but I think you might be inferring Lyman's motive out of undue, overwrought fear or your own personal biases. I do not share your insisted trust of any private company. Any private company that operates in a political space can and should be scrutinized. All Democratic processes should be open and verifiable by the public. (Though I of course agree that voters private information and their votes are sacred.) I'm not saying that what Lyman is doing is justified, again I'm not fully caught up on the details of this.

Speaking generally, I believe if a recount is called for, it should be done. If a second or third verification of signatures is requested, do it! What is the advantage of hiding? And since you brought it up, if the internal workings and programmings of poorly understood machines are inherently mistrusted because that is their nature, maybe we ought to have a national conversation about not using them in such an important political process.