Re: What is Data Model FOR?

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 11:34:38 CDT

At 9:01 AM -0500 4/30/04, Douglas W. Jones wrote:
>On Apr 29, 2004, at 2:48 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:
>>That's true you have easier ways to reconcile. However, since you
>>already have to tabulate the actual results in order to do IRV (for
>>example), you might as well reconcile the actual results.
>No. The reason is, you want a reconciliation process that is easy for
>people to do by scanning a table of precinct results and comparing the
>numbers with something they wrote down at the polling place. The
>government can reconcile things inside computers using actual results,
>but you need simple paper and pencil reconciliation schemes outside
>the computer that observers and interested members of the public can
>apply to the canvass in order to assure themselves that all the votes
>from all the precincts went into the final result.

So simplicity in reconciliation is critical, even if the
reconciliation calculation is lossy. Just like checksums or MD5

Best regards,

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 23:17:26 2004

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