Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Windsock who wrote (116635)	11/10/2000 10:46:50 AM
From: GVTucker	Respond to of 186894

Windsock, if you note the last paragraph of the post you responded to, you'll find that I agree with you.

To: Windsock who wrote (116635)	11/10/2000 11:20:51 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "In every country except Palm Beach the presidential candidates were vertically aligned with the mark on the right. So the vertical alignment instead of the butterfly is "pactical". The vertical alignment of the parties in the order of votes received in a past election is required by law and was communicated to the county voting officials in a letter. The order is R's then Dem's then somebody. The placing of Buchanan in the the #2 slot on the butterfly ballot also violates Florida law' Windsock, for some strange reason you apparently missed this part: "(6) Voting squares may be placed in front of or in back of the names of candidates and statements of questions and shall be of such size as is compatible with the type of system used" Why is it that you didn't post this part? EP