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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (80679)	11/18/2000 1:28:43 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 769667

I look at the data myself. The individuals who wrote for the times are most likely the same technically illerate who when they write about something that I know are always in the .3 percentile of understanding what the are writing about. my stuff. fvwm.home.dhs.org trade.home.dhs.org the real eyes watman.com Tom Watson tosiwmee

To: E who wrote (80679)	11/18/2000 1:30:14 AM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 769667

Quotes from the article which give us doubt of the articles accuracy. "The people who sell the voting systems... say the machines can be, in ideal conditions, 99.99 percent accurate..." What people? Why not give us their names? But in Florida, that tiny error rate alone could have misread 345 votes — which happens to be more than Mr. Bush's current winning margin. Could have? It also could not have. Ultimately, industry officials said, the most precise way to count ballots is by hand. What industry officials? Can we really believe the NY Times, a very partisan pro Democratic paper? Why not give us the names of the industry officials? Finally, who is Mr. Swartz? What company does he work for? Is he the owner, President, Engineer in involved with metrics? Why not give us the specifics?