I know that I didn't know this but knew that someone here did. No need to be
an expert if there are others to draw knowledge from.
The point is Nick, that to create a bill to be presented at the state house
we have to come up with some distinctive wording. It should be of finite
choices otherwise clerks and the SoS are allowed to interpret perceived gray
areas.
As best in any hunt for appropriations or deal making, you come to the table
asking more than you comfortably need. You can allow for your opponents to
take something away. If you read the bills as they go to the legislative
council you may read some wild statements, intended to be struck in
committee.
So we come up with a method of hand counted statistical analysis, then
inflate our needs three times and then go to sell it. Just like retail.
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Bernstein [mailto:nicholas.bernstein@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 8:34 AM
To: Some Guy
Cc: cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Hand count or open source
You know, there is a whole branch of science dedicated to problems like
this; it's called mathematics.
If you want to be sure that your counts are accurate to within 1% with
95% confidence, you need an unbiased sample size of approximately 10,000
for any population size of of 100,000+.
N
PS Compare that with the 700 needed for the same accuracy and confidence
if people were allowed to check their own votes.
Some Guy wrote:
Statistical sampling is a good idea. Neal proposed 1%. I think that's far
too small.
--
My razor-sharp wit was confiscated at airport security.