SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Angels of Alchemy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SpinCity1 who wrote (23260)12/13/2000 11:11:35 AM
From: Jo Ellen T  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24256
 
Yeah, we need to get that 'hiding place' back up.

:) JE



To: SpinCity1 who wrote (23260)12/13/2000 5:34:42 PM
From: djj  Respond to of 24256
 
Seems to be there was a standard for counting ballots. The standard was set in the process of casting the vote and by the machines ability to read the ballots,

This is the standard for MACHINE counting.
Standards for HAND counts were the point of dissention the last few weeks.
Whether or not hand counts should even be done is also a different question, but seeing as hand counts are accepted by the makers of the voting machines to be more accurate then any arguments against them are purely political.

It is obvious that when dealing with millions of cheap paper ballots and cheesy plastic voting machines that some ballots will be marked in a way that is erroneously read by a dumb machine. Maybe it takes an engineer to see this clearly.

Hand counting does not have to mean accepting dimpled ballots - just refining the fallible machine counts to be closer to the truth.

I found it amazing that so much effort was focused on voters "Intent".

Hanging chads represent a clear voter intent that would not show up in a machine count.
If that is so amazing maybe you should take a grade school science class or watch some Mr. wizard shows...

I think it is sad that people will continue to be brain-washed into thinking that all of the votes were not counted.

What's sad is adults who pretend not to understand the fallibility of voting machines and the plain fact that hand counting is much more accurate.

Peace to everyone
djj



To: SpinCity1 who wrote (23260)12/14/2000 12:55:09 AM
From: Exedous  Respond to of 24256
 
OT--Spin -- Don't agree with everything you said, but I agree with much of it. You make many valid points. -- Exedous