You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #37: Well, I kind of figured that was the case, and the reason OTOH didn't respond. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-15-10 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Well, I kind of figured that was the case, and the reason OTOH didn't respond.
Edited on Sun Aug-15-10 01:23 AM by Wilms
I think once he understood what I was asking for--audits that yield high levels of confidence in close non-state-wide elections--he realised there wasn't going to be much in the way of encouraging news.

While I agree the near universally flawed audits occasionally conducted could act to deter a thief, they'd have no influence on Murphy's law as it relates to electronic hardware, software, and ballot programming.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC