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 (128515)	11/14/2000 12:14:21 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570432

"The optically scanned paper ballots are the best system so far that satisfies these goals." And you have excellent points. But there will be an error margin which is quantifiable with any paper system, so there should be rules in place on what to do when the difference between the candidates falls below the margin of error. Flip a coin, maybe? It would be as accurate...

To: pgerassi who wrote (128515)	11/14/2000 12:38:05 PM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1570432

Pete Re..Our government was set up with checks and balances, so any system should have five goals, ease of use, speed, accuracy, repeatability, and auditable by humans. Without the last which gives voters the ability to trust the result, the first four are hard to use. The optically scanned paper ballots are the best system so far that satisfies these goals. Excellent post. Frankly it should be easy to do paper ballots which can be read accurately without having to worry about a chad. I am talking about using lasers to burn holes in a ballot instead of punching out holes or using a special ink which glows; or at least having the voting machine draw the line properly so we don't have false lines. Surely we can came up with better paper ballots. Secondly we ought to demand each voting machine use at least one AMD chip, so I can get something out of this mess.