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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joseph Beltran who wrote (40650)	12/9/2000 6:17:50 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 70976

re: I, for one, would rather rely (and accept as final) the results of a machine You mean, you don't believe them, when they say they are being objective and fair, and acting from the highest of motives? That's what everyone says they are doing.

To: Joseph Beltran who wrote (40650)	12/9/2000 6:26:08 PM
From: Math Junkie	Respond to of 70976

Since QQQ trading doesn't close until 4:15, they were still trading when the Florida Supreme Court decision was announced. About 80% of the day's gains were erased in fifteen minutes. OT "I, for one, would rather rely (and accept as final) the results of a machine which only counts completely punched holes as "countable, legal votes" rather than on the interpretation of different individuals operating under different standards trying to determine the intent of a voter who couldn't punch a hole to begin with." The lack of a standard is a problem, to be sure, but machines have their own problems, such as the fact that the difference between the first and second machine counts was more than five times the difference between candidates. Since partially detached chad falls off with every pass through the machines, maybe the way to do it would be to keep running it through the machines until the difference between counts is less than the difference between candidates.