Angry

So?? How do distinguish deliberate fraud from stuff happens?

You examine the publicly available source code.


The problem is you have two votes - electronic and paper
- that do not agree. How do you know which is correct?

You don't. But you do know that the vote tally from that machine is
suspect. It should never happen.

(ok, you can stop laughing)

But it should never happen. Vote tallying is inherently simple, even if
voting theory is inherenly complex. Any beginning programmer can write
a program to tally votes (and also to mis-tally them). If the computer
can't count, then something is massively wrong.

Heading back on topic, the altimeter says 5,000 feet and the GPS 6,000.
Which is correct?

You don't know. But what you do know, which is valuable, is not to
conduct an instrument approach in IMC with this kind of discrepancy.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

lynn wrote:
criticize and belittle your leaders? "

Care to document?

Huh? Do you actually read the posts or do you just jerk-off "OBTW"
snippets of delinquency? If you COULD actually READ the major news
media, you would have all the documentation you would want.

OBTW, getting a blow-job in the White House is not a sign of
leadership.

OBTW, really? I did not know that! ))) Nor is: You do a lot of
ranting and raving. U R Borderline WACKO! No! U R WACKO!!!!! a
sign of much intelligence! ))

He...he... No wonder you don`t want to talk politics in this arena or
any other I imagine. ))

Have a happy holiday and may the new year bless you with good health.

Tien

"sfb" wrote in message news:sSXsf.9913$Q73.2199@trnddc03...
Hand counting a sample proves nothing

I never said it "proves" anything.

as you can't assume the identical distribution of votes in the uncounted
votes.

Who would make such an assumption? Why would you? What point in making
such an assumption would there be?

George and Al are tied with 100 electronic votes each. You count a
sample of 20 paper receipts and Al is ahead 15 to 5. Other than Al won
the sample, you have learned absolutely nothing about the correctness of
the total vote.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"sfb" wrote in message
news:sSXsf.9913$Q73.2199@trnddc03...
Hand counting a sample proves nothing

I never said it "proves" anything.

as you can't assume the identical distribution of votes in the
uncounted votes.

Who would make such an assumption? Why would you? What point in
making such an assumption would there be?

"sfb" wrote in message news:Nj3tf.8766$3Y3.2508@trnddc02...
[...] you have learned absolutely nothing about the correctness of the
total vote.

So what? The random audit isn't intended to tell you anything "about the
correctness of the total vote.

Please explain what "auditing" a sample of the paper receipts
establishes since the only thing that matters is the total votes cast
for each candidate.

An election isn't a production line making a gazillion identical widgets
per day where sampling will tell you something about meeting
specifications. A election produces a different product for each
candidate on the ballot. The only way to know how many votes each
candidate got is counting every single vote.

Early in the day 2004 exit polls predicted a Kerry win only to be proven
wrong by the actual votes since the sampling was apparently biased to
only asking Kerry voters.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"sfb" wrote in message
news:Nj3tf.8766$3Y3.2508@trnddc02...
[...] you have learned absolutely nothing about the correctness of
the total vote.

So what? The random audit isn't intended to tell you anything "about
the correctness of the total vote.

Recently, Larry Dighera posted:

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:10:26 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote in
: :

Why couldn't receipts be counted by hand? As a method of
verification, the task isn't all that large. Still, if the receipts
followed a standard layout, they could be counted by machine quite
easily.

What method would you employ to assure that the receipts are not
forgeries?

The same method that assures that paper ballots aren't forgeries. If you
go back a few messages, I suggested that *two* receipts would be printed &
verified by the voter; one would be given to the polling official, just as
paper ballots are handled now. Then, at least one machine selected at
random from each precinct would have its electronic tally audited against
the receipt. In the case of a discrepancy, a 100% audit would be performed
at that precinct.

Neil

Recently, sfb posted:

So?? How do distinguish deliberate fraud from stuff happens? The
problem is you have two votes - electronic and paper - that do not
agree. How do you know which is correct?

If the paper receipt has been verified by the voter as representing their
vote, then that one is correct. If the electronic tally disagrees, then it
is wrong.

Heading back on topic, the altimeter says 5,000 feet and the GPS
6,000. Which is correct?

If you are trying to avoid traffic, you'd best use the same method of
measurement that other traffic is using.

This isn't rocket science.

Neil

Flyingmonk opined

Receipts can be easily faked also. Even with the bat codes on them, if
let's say 6 million were faked, are we going to try to recertify 6
million receipts by hand?

The big problem with receipts is that they can be used for selling votes.


-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

"Tien Dao" wrote in message
.. .

You can stop your pedantic antics. No previous super-power leader should
be so humiliated as Clinton and by his own people least of all.


Clinton's humiliation, if he actually felt any humiliation, was his own
doing.



Really? It "belongs" to the "people" as much as the Constitution, the
Senate and the House? I guess you can just drop in any time for a cup of
tea
since it really "belongs" to you? )) The guy's the world's leader. He
can do
whatever he wants in that office!! Yah, so he lied about a blow job. Big
deal? All lies great and small are equally impeachable? You guys think
it is as important a lie as covering up for breaking into Watergate?


Clinton lied under oath.



Really? How observant. I guess I am the only "conservative" who sees the
similarities between the two wars, and how difficult it will be to get
out, lose the peace and lose face, again. Then the public will really
hesitate
to get into another war like the post-Vietnam era when a strong America is
really what the world needs at this time.


What are the similarities?



Americans have done more to damage to your own standing in the public
opinion of the world by these acts of political naiveté than any outside
threat.


So doing the right thing causes world opinion of the US to drop. I'm okay
with that.



The world just doesn`t know where america stands on many issues
because your public opinion polls control policy.


That was true under the previous administration, but it is not true today.