Re: Ballot shuffle and judge training

[Paul E Condon <pecondon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:42:08PM -0700, Some Guy wrote:
> Paul C.
> 
> Are you telling me that you weren't instructed to hand out the ballots in
> random order? I think that's what you are telling me. The word 'shuffle' was
> my own. The words that Linda Salas used was 'hand them out randomly'.

I am a science/math techy nerd. For me 'random' is a wake-up word. It
was not used in the training session that I attended for the primary.
Further, I'm almost certain that the presenter of the training had no
checklist of topics that must be covered and no planned order of 
presentation.

Yes, 'shuffle' is your word, but it is an OK word for whatever Salas
was talking about. I have since heard here repeat 'hand them out
randomly' in person. I think she does not really appreciate what that
entails.  It is just something she says in the hope that it will quiet
her critics.

My second training session (for the general election) was entirely free of content. As
I recall there was no discussion of any issue. The verbal instructions
were to call the emergency help number if you had problems, but I
already knew that the help number would be busy from my experience on
the primary.

The judges manuals in both elections were awful. There was no system
for identifying which of the many forms provided was the particular
form for a particular problem. (This involves having a unique form
identifier code on each form and referencing that identifier in the
instructions. You see this system on IRS tax forms.  It is essential
to the functioning of any bureaucracy.) There should be a usability
test for the instructions.  This is usually the job of an editor or
publication reviewer. I saw no evidence of editing for usability.

Among other things that might be done to improve the training, the
people writing it should organize test runs in which candidate
judges conduct a mock election while the authors observe and listen
to the questions asked of one judge by another.

The excuse given when I complained was that the SoS and Fed.s had
mandated that all counties must use the same instructions. This is
such manifest nonsense that it might just be true.

I didn't get fired for asking questions, but I really didn't get
any encouragement either. I'll apply to do it again this year.
I'm 73. Maybe that's old enough to pass a senility test.

... I've deleted the rest of the message from Paul T. to which I'm
responding. I largely agree, and youv'e all read it already.

-- 
Paul E Condon           
pecondon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx