[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: openvotingconsortium

To: "'Cvv-Discuss@Coloradovoter. Net'" <cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: openvotingconsortium
From: "Paul Tiger" <paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 01:24:58 -0600
Delivered-to: mailing list cvv-discuss@coloradovoter.net
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <NIBBLNDBNFKKONHMDCHDAEICCAAA.paul.tiger@colorado.edu>
List-help: <mailto:cvv-discuss-help@coloradovoter.net>
List-post: <mailto:cvv-discuss@coloradovoter.net>
List-subscribe: <mailto:cvv-discuss-subscribe@coloradovoter.net>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:cvv-discuss-unsubscribe@coloradovoter.net>
Mailing-list: contact cvv-discuss-help@coloradovoter.net; run by ezmlm
Reply-to: <paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Oops, that was an error. You can only tally the ballots on something that's
been certified by the state (SoS).
pt

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Tiger [mailto:paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 1:18 AM
To: 'Cvv-Discuss@Coloradovoter. Net'
Subject: RE: openvotingconsortium
[|>] snip
So you wouldn't have to count the ballots on
same manufacture of equipment. Any PC with bar scanning software could do
it.
[|>]

References:
- RE: openvotingconsortium
  - From: Paul Tiger

Prev by Date: RE: openvotingconsortium
Next by Date: RE: openvotingconsortium
Previous by thread: RE: openvotingconsortium
Next by thread: RE: openvotingconsortium
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread