RE: Hand count or open source

["Some Guy" <someguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul E Condon [mailto:pecondon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:41 PM
<snip>

To me, it means that everyone agrees with me: The question was put in
a confrontational way to which it was difficult to respond politely.
[|>]
[|>] Completely intentional. This group, as with many groups, is not of
single mind or intent. Members tend to wander of is some rather unrelated
directions rather quickly. If not for Bob and Paul W, we might be talking
about recipes for salt-water taffy by now.
[|>] ----

The use of hand count and machine count both have problems. Choosing the
one that appears at the moment to have fewer problems seems unwise.
The paper record of a hand count is hard to verify. In some ways it is
like DRE, you do the count once. Where is the verification in that?
In DRE, you do the count once, and print the results as many times as
the law requires.
[|>]
[|>] What the C&R of our county did that they've called a hand count is
really a hybrid.
The ballots were scanned and the images stored. The images were then
reviewed by humans, who directed attached computers to relate a particular
image to what they decided the vote was on that ballot.

Had the barcodes all be readable and the serialization system worked, then
each ballot with its tally would have been stored in the computer database
so that each could be recalled.
Most of people think that this is unimportant, but we want to show how each
precinct voted for a number of reasons.

I am of the opinion that computer scanned counts of paper ballots are
viable. I believe that we need to address the laws of this state that say
that we are not permitted to do hand re-counts or verify computer counts
with hand counts, or mix both methods.

Paul - I think that you are not going to find anyone on this list, or
throughout any of the voter integrity groups, that has any confidence in
DREs.

What I am looking for, and I think what everyone here is looking for are
solutions. There's no need to re-hash all the horror stories of the past to
prove to ourselves and each other that there is a need for new systems and
methods. We all know what the bad stuff it, lets move on to solving the
problems.

Some Guy who wants to dwell in the positive