Handling misconducted elections

From: charlie strauss <cems_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Wed Nov 24 2004 - 13:26:40 CST

One of the signs of a robust system is not just that has limited
opportunity for error but that it can recover gracefully. Has OVC
given thought to how deal with problems that occur when its procedures
are not followed or large events happen.

For example, suppose an election is run and there are massive, not
small, difference in the electronic and paper records during the
reconcilation process. What should be the policy short of declaring a
miss-election and re-doing it. Presumably this should be based on
common sense and not dogma like "the paper records win in every
dispute". What if for example, for some reason the paper record were
leaving out an entire race and no one caught it till way late in the
system. Surely we would want to use the electronic records. Of course
then at least have the reconcilation process to validate the existence
of each electronic record.

If a single paper ballot shows up without an electronic record how is
it considered? What if hundreds do, and the paper totals agree better
with the number of voters than the electroinc ones?

Is this worked out?
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Nov 30 23:17:39 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:17:44 CST