Re: In situ ballot printer

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Sat Jun 19 2004 - 14:08:01 CDT

At 11:49 AM -0700 6/19/04, Alan Dechert wrote:
>Arthur,
>
>> Better not to use Latin.
>>
>Maybe so, maybe not.
>
>> And is that referring to our system? I
>> think few would know what it means.
>>
>It might be okay if they have to *learn* what it means. This underscores
>the fact that our system is different.

Or they might not bother learning and just guess or ignore. That's
what may happen with *any* non-intuitive name we propose.

> > If so, how about this class of ideas.
>>
>> I'm not sure we've settled on a specific answer for our type of paper
>> ballot, but suppose it is:
>>
>> Paper Summary Ballot
>>
>> Then our system would be a:
>>
>> Paper Summary Ballot Marking System
>>
>This is a mouthful. Very awkward, imo.
>
>Alan D.

If you want to convey the concept, then Polling Place Ballot Printer
does it without Latin.

I prefer Paper Summary Ballot Printer, however, and less awkward (and
another reason for it to be a *Paper* Summary Ballot). I think that
computerized or such an adjective is unnecessary.

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
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:20 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:30 CDT