RE: What is Data Model FOR?

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Thu Apr 29 2004 - 15:28:30 CDT

At 3:07 PM -0500 4/29/04, Mark Winegar wrote:
>Well, let's consider the nature of a spoiled ballot. Isn't it a ballot
>that is invalid because a choice has been made that presents an
>exception to the rule. We can capture the exception through validity
>testing before the data is entered and allow the elector to make a valid
>choice thereby saving the ballot. I think that's a good thing.

Certainly we will do that, and DRE vendors make the same claim. Our
concept is that voters *can* make mistakes and discover them when the
review the printed ballot. We *have* to handle that case.

>I was thinking it would be more valid in that it faithfully count to
>contests acurately and it would also represent those ballots that
>somehow didn't get into the ballot box.

That's one of the criticisms we get from DRE vendors.

>Which brings forward another
>question, "How do we prevent hardcopy ballots from be lost?"

May I suggest you review the discussions we've had already on these topics?

Best regards,
Arthur

>Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Arthur Keller [mailto:arthur@kellers.org]
>Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:00 PM
>To: voting-project@lists.sonic.net
>Subject: RE: [voting-project] What is Data Model FOR?
>
>
>Mark,
>
>The computer count is NOT more accurate than the paper count. The
>computer count includes spoiled paper ballots.
>
>Please think it through and make suggestions on HOW it should be
>done. We already know that it needs to be done.
>
>Otherwise, we're just spinning our wheels and getting nowhere.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Best regards,
>Arthur
>
>At 1:28 PM -0500 4/29/04, Mark Winegar wrote:
>>Arthur,
>>
>>Yes, there has to be a better process of managing the paper ballots
>>because it appears that the computer count is more accurate than the
>>paper count. In what ways can the paper count be improved?
>>
>>Local reconciliation probably isn't a bad thing.
>>
>>Mark
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Arthur Keller [mailto:arthur@kellers.org]
>>Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:13 AM
>>To: voting-project@lists.sonic.net
>>Cc: voting-project@lists.sonic.net
>>Subject: RE: [voting-project] What is Data Model FOR?
>>
>>
>>At 10:32 AM -0500 4/29/04, Mark Winegar wrote:
>>>Doug,
>>>
>>>Better accuracy is often achieved by eliminating the humor error
>>>factor.
>>>
>>>
>>>In both scenarios discussed below there are opportunities for the
>>>human
>>
>>>error factor to contaminate the canvassing. We can improve the whole
>>>process by having two distinct canvassing processes; one based on the
>>>voter's computer input and the other based on paper ballots. I believe
>
>>>the comparison of these distinct data sets will help detect, and
>>>prevent, tampering.
>>>
>>>Mark Winegar
>>
>>Actually, our approach is to reconcile the paper and electronic as
>>early as feasible after the polls close. Once you've done that,
>>distinct canvassing systems compounds the discrepancies. There can be
>>discrepancies between paper and electronic, such as spoiled ballots.
>>Or ballots never deposited in the ballot box. Unless you reconcile as
>>locally as feasible, it's hard to effectively reconcile in larger
>>contexts. And when you expect there to be discrepancies (spoiled
>>ballots), you have to drill down anyway.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Arthur
>>
>>--
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>-
>>-------
>>Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303-4507 tel
>>+1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
>
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------
>Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303-4507 tel
>+1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Fri Apr 30 23:17:25 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT