Re: Ms. Tobi's overheated rhetoric

From: Arlene Montemarano <mikarl_at_starpower_dot_net>
Date: Mon Nov 12 2007 - 13:45:43 CST

Arthur, I want to provide a sensible answer. Please give me a little
time to work this part out, and see what other people who know a great
deal more than I have to offer on this point.


Arthur Keller wrote:
> For me, the most transparent method is to use a database not
> connected to a network into which the totals from each precinct as
> somehow entered. A CD is periodically burned with the incremental
> totals (plus individual precinct totals), and this CD is entered into
> a separate system for displaying the results to the web. That
> separate system allows the download of a spreadsheet with whatever
> individual precinct totals have come in so far. That spreadsheet
> could be used to check against the posted precinct totals, which
> could have been generated by hand-count or machine-count or a
> combination of both.
> I don't see how transparency can be provided without the use of
> computers, and I've been thinking about this problem for several
> years. Do you have a better answer?
> Best regards,
> Arthur
> At 12:32 PM -0500 11/12/07, Arlene Montemarano wrote:
>> Clearly aggregation is exactly where cleverness is called for to
>> maintain transparency in the chain of custody. But cleverness is
>> aplenty for those who are motivated to use it.
>> Lots of big brains out there.
>> Arthur Keller wrote:
>>> The problem is how you aggregate those precincts into an overall
>>> total without transcription errors. While the DRE voting machines
>>> have been attacked as potential sources of error or fraud, it is much
>>> easier to hack the systems that add up the votes at County Central.
>>> I understand that GEMS uses Microsoft Access with no logs and
>>> essentially no security. Not enough attention has been focused on
>>> the aggregation of the votes.
>>> Aggregation of the votes in large urban areas is problematic even if
>>> the precincts are hand-counted. And when the precincts are only
>>> hand-counted, transcription errors are more likely than if the
>>> precinct counts are transmitted in a form that is computer readable.
>>> A compromise is to have the precinct totals printed on tally sheets
>>> with bubbles (or lines to connect) from 0-9 for each digit of each
>>> total to be reported.

OVC-discuss mailing list
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain

Received on Fri Nov 30 23:17:19 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 23:17:31 CST