RE: How can Neal say Boulder's election was accurate

[Evan Daniel Ravitz <evan@xxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Some Guy wrote:

> For the length of time that it took to count the vote, it could have been
> done by hand in each precinct.

I believe countries that do it by hand do it in precincts -in hours,
not days.

What we have is the kluge of kluges: Illegally tested (thanks for
trying, Al) proprietary software running on Windows, intersecting
with the vaguaries of printing, and the greatest motive in history:
the Presidency.

If humans see imperfect boxes we have no problem compensating.

But instead of hand-counting which is cheaper ($1.82/vote in Canada
compared to $3-6 here) more accurate (according to MIT/Caltech),
done in public (poll watchers watching) with the $ going to humans
not software corps, we will get a very sophistocated expensive
way of making the boxes better, kluged on top of the pile of shit
we're now buying.

Poll watchers THINK they're watching now, but they're staring at
"black boxes."

Evan