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: Mani1 who wrote (120256)	12/2/2000 4:30:43 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 186894

Mani, <Average American does not understand this and the media and the politicians are milking it for all it is worth.> I don't know about the average American, but I sure understand it. As for the media, like Jimmy Mac said, they've got a vested interest in prolonging this as long as possible. As if premature victory calls during Election night wasn't bad enough. Tenchusatsu

To: Mani1 who wrote (120256)	12/2/2000 5:03:04 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 186894

When are people are going to realize that the election process, just like any other process has an error margin. It just so happens that this election is within that error of margin!! That would assume that the error margin is independent of the counting method, or that, as the Bush camp is propagandizing, machine counts are somehow more accurate than manual methods. Some contrary information can be seen in nytimes.com . To start with: Think every vote counts? Think again. Problems with automated vote-counting equipment, especially the computer card punch type used in south Florida, have been well documented, said Rebecca Mercuri, a visiting professor of computer science at Bryn Mawr College. ``You will never get the same numbers,'' she said. ``If you run thousands of these cards through again and again, you will continue to get different numbers that are coming up. ``An error rate of 2 percent to 5 percent, believe it or not, is considered acceptable by most election officials ... if the error is evenly distributed across all of the candidates.'' A nice quote from the end: State Rep. Tom Feeney, the House Speaker-designate, said he would consider measures to expedite the vote count, but he's reluctant to make hasty changes. ``Can we modernize? Can we do things quicker? Yes,'' said Feeney, a Republican. ``But I don't like passing law based on anecdotal evidence.'' Mr. Feeney is of course perfectly willing to go with the indisputable (and totally unanecdotal) evidence from the Bush campaign that hand counting would somehow be more inaccurate, not less. Also in contrast to the established rules in Texas. Mr Feeney, like Ms. Harris, is so sure of the correct stance of the Bush campaign that he'll be leading the charge to take matters out of the courts and into his own hands, if that proves to be necessary. Political affiliation has nothing to do with it, of course.

To: Mani1 who wrote (120256)	12/2/2000 5:10:58 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Mani, RE:"When are people are going to realize that the election process, just like any other process has an error margin. Surely you jest? RE:"It just so happens that this election is within that error of margin!! OK, but if you recount 4 times and the same guy wins, that's enough isn't it? Apparently not... RE:"Average American does not understand this" Not even close to understanding it. RE:"And the media and the politicians are milking it for all it is worth. And for two different reasons:Media=big income Politicians:Setting up for the next election. --- It's become kind of like a pi$$ing contest. One side says: if you do this, this and this...we win... The other side says:, yeah but what about this, this and this. Then you lose... Jim