Re: Printers Revisited

From: Karl Auerbach <karl_at_cavebear_dot_com>
Date: Sun May 23 2004 - 17:56:37 CDT

> > One major reason is that they (ink jets) don't overload UPS's. ....
> >
> As Far As I Can See, this is the only reason favoring inkjets you give that
> means much.

Are we to really so quickly discount the ink jet aspects of shorter time
to print, availability of color, instant feedback to voters that something
is happening, lower cost, easy maintanence, smaller form factor, less
heat, less power, and often better print quality and paper handling?

A while back there was a posting on this list that described the rather
intricate procedures for dealing with power outages - procedures that
involved shutting down half the machines, running the remainder until they
alarmed as nearing total power exhaustion, then switching over to the
othef half of the machines. That tends to argue rather strongly that
power failures *is* a concern.

(Power failures are not hypothetical - here on the California coast, there
are few homes or businesses that have not well learned the value of a
stockpile of flashlights, batteries, lanterns, and candles.)

> We plan to have a battery powered mobile voting station too,

This is the first time I have heard this. But assuming we have one - this
would mean a switchover of procedures and equipment during a confusing
time. That sounds like an invitation to disaster. The time when things
are going wrong is not a good time to switch to different equipment. And
as was mentioned on the phone today by someone who spends a lot of time
being a poll worker - a lot of those folks, well intended as they are, are
not necessarily well suited or adequately trained, much less well
rehearsed, for that kind of thing.

= 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 23:17:58 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT