Re: Questions from election officials

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 17:48:35 CDT

At 5:30 PM -0500 5/3/04, Douglas W. Jones wrote:
>On May 3, 2004, at 2:53 PM, charlie strauss wrote:
>>Thanks for the sensible replies. I have one follow-up question.
>>given a card stock preference (requirement) this might have a
>>determining effect on the choice of printers. Will commodity
>>laser/ink/thermal/dye-sub printers print well on card stock?
>Yes, so long as it's lightweight card stock. We aren't aiming
>at printing on cerial-box-grade cardboard!
>> seems like there might be some issues here such as paper-tray
>>size, feed paths, paper finish, dust, and ink drying times.
> Doug Jones

28 or 32 pound paper works pretty well, has appropriate semistiffness
(e.g., card or cover stock creases more easily than heavy text
stock). And it's much cheaper that card or cover stock. You could
use watermarked paper with some degree of preprinting in the margins
that won't interfere with the scanning process, to reduce the list of
ballot stuffing. If you want, you could have a numbered perforated
tear off that's removed when placing the ballot in the box, so you
can more easily control ballot stock.

Standardization of paper, ink, printers, scanners, etc., creates a
reliable system for certification. We don't want scanning problems
like in Napa (I think that's where they had the problems with varying
pen ink types).

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 Mon May 31 23:17:06 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT