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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (128428)	11/13/2000 9:22:32 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570498

"The problem with manual recount" If they had asked me, I would have thrown out all of the PB ballots. The whole idea of an acceptable error in balloting is a weird one. And look at the results, sure if there is a clear winner then the problem is minimal. But the case where the victory margin is smaller than the margin of error, well then a tie should be declared. As one poster on Raging Bull suggested, maybe the $3 check off on the income tax should go to putting a modern balloting system in place. I think this would be more valuable that the Federal matching funds for an election. There are electronic balloting systems out there, there is at least one company in Illinois which makes a system. Heck, I could design the hardware with a bill of materials that would be a few hundred dollars for a system with a touch LCD at the balloting stations. A bit more if you use a wireless link. The software would be more complex, it has to auditable and tamper resistant, but it definitely is doable. Sure, it would be more expensive than present systems, but what is the present debacle going to cost before it is all over?