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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chitral who wrote (37844)	11/16/2000 4:09:55 PM
From: cheryl williamson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Hi Chitral, The bad machine errors should be fixable. If the machine is working properly and the cards are not mis-punched, there should be a highly accurate reading. It's true that bad data (cards) won't work. If you have a huge stack of misshaped & mis-punched cards, they just will not go thru the machine. It should be easy to test basic hardware/software before each run with a test deck filled with mis-punches, upside-down cards etal. If the test deck is processed to expectations, you should be able to make a run for real and meet those expectations. As for dups. It's true that cards can be read 2-at-a-time, but they would probably both be rejected (mis-alignment). I can imagine that in any run of punch cards you would get some rejects. If the percentage is small, they can be dealt with by hand, or re-submitted. However, in my mind, accuracy means that you can account for what happened. Faith isn't really part of the equation. I, for one, am not convinced that a hand-count of 1million or so votes will be within the error margin of a well-operating card reader. If it is at a variance of 2-5%, then what do you do????