Re: Accuracy and repeatability in optical ballot scanners.

From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joehall_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Wed Feb 02 2005 - 19:45:48 CST

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:53:00 -0800 (PST), Edmund R. Kennedy
<ekennedyx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I'm thinking that whatever the error rate is
> discovered for optical ballot scanners that these be
> used as the threshold numbers for setting accuracy
> standards for voting equipment and for recounts. I
> know that there was a discussion on this a month or
> two ago but I think that there was always the problem
> of how to set a numerical base level of error
> tolerance. Seeing as optical scan equipment seems to
> be the best pragmatic standard hardware I could see
> this as a good point to nail down error tolerance.
>
> Does anybody have any comments or ideas about this?

There are some documents that have come to light in FOIA requests that
the BlackBoxVoting crew have made... let me see if I can find them:

Here we go... there's some indication of error rates with Diebold OS
machines here:
http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/2197/2351.html?1106510918

-- 
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
UC Berkeley, SIMS PhD Student
http://pobox.com/~joehall/
blog: http://pobox.com/~joehall/nqb2/
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Sun Feb 27 17:17:02 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 27 2005 - 17:17:13 CST