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

Re: Boulder County's counting crawls




On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 1:18 AM, Paul Tiger <paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Lou (et al),

Seemingly unbeknownst to most voters, bleed through has no impact on the scanning process. The boxes from one side to the other do not overlap. Not even close. The system is looking for marks inside the boxes. Marks outside the boxes don't register at all.

I agree that only the field approximating the boxes are INTENDED to be scanned, but if I'm recalling aright, the badly printed ballots (and/or the registration software) of 2004 were incredibly, inexplicably OFF-register, and a dangerously beknownst or unbeknownst voter could become irrationally exuberant about getting his ballot counted.


However, your idea that white-out flakes could be the cause is something to consider. The real test would be to collect some of this offending "dust" and chemically analyze it. It bothers me that the clerk's office would make such definitive pronouncements about what the interfering material was. For all we know it could be ricin.


Aarrgh -- Texas-weaponized white powder again -- that's all we need.


  Lou Puls wrote:
If I may add my modest comments to the ongoing blizzard, ...


--
"Finally, one might consider cooperative ownership structures, where the originators of mortgages must hold the capital in the government-sponsored [i.e. NOW taxpayer-secured] enterprises ..."
~~Ben Bernanke, Chairman of Federal Reserve Bank, 31 Oct 2008