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 #29: You're the one who clearly doesn't understand how a 3% audit works. [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
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-22-10 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. You're the one who clearly doesn't understand how a 3% audit works.
You don't audit scanners, you audit the BALLOTS. 3% of, say, a state legislature election with 100,000 votes is 3,000 votes. If those votes match up exactly with how the scanners say they read, then the likelihood is extremely low that

Your "one bad scanner" theory doesn't pass the smell test. For starters, one scanner displaying radically different results than others in similar areas would trigger obvious scrutiny and a manual count anyway. If all the other machines at a given polling place go 55/45 for one candidate, and machine X goes 99 to 1 for the other, that's considered suspicious behavior.

For errors to affect the outcome of an election WITHOUT one machine being obviously out of whack, it would require many machines not counting properly. That's what the 3% audit is to test for--it indicates whether the machines are operating properly and whether a larger recount is needed.

Lastly, there's nothing about the new system that suggests your "one bad machine" theory is any more likely now than before. The old lever machines could just as easily provide a bad count. Only difference is, now there's a way to check them. While I'm not wild about the new machines, basing arguments about them on specious information and possibly deliberate misunderstandings of statistical probability is not the way to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -ERIE COUNTY NY: The problem wasn't the memory cards -- just the software that READS them! Bill Bored  Nov-18-10 12:09 AM   #0 
  - I live in Buffalo, looks like voting was a waste of my time, soon NY will go RED  Dragonfli   Nov-18-10 10:53 AM   #1 
  - Voting is not a waste of time. There's a chance our votes may be counted as cast - just no proof. nt  Bill Bored   Nov-18-10 01:49 PM   #3 
  - Without proof, money gets to win. They are only kept honest by proof  Dragonfli   Nov-18-10 02:05 PM   #4 
     - Don't get me wrong. Proof is good! LOVE THE PROOF! But if you don't vote...  Bill Bored   Nov-19-10 12:31 AM   #8 
  - Paranoid much?  TheWraith   Nov-18-10 02:18 PM   #5 
  - I'm a programmer, is knowledge paranoia? I know what can be done with the software.  Dragonfli   Nov-18-10 07:20 PM   #7 
  - Thanks, but I've been working with computers for about 20 years now.  TheWraith   Nov-19-10 03:27 AM   #11 
     - Silly assumption: Anything wrong in the software count will show up in the 3% canvass. nt  Bill Bored   Nov-20-10 12:42 AM   #13 
     - Silly assumption: that 2 plus 2 equals purple.  TheWraith   Nov-21-10 02:21 AM   #15 
        - The effects of cluster sampling would invalidate what I think you're trying to say.  Bill Bored   Nov-21-10 09:25 PM   #21 
     - its about Public Confidence in Outcome of Election  WillYourVoteBCounted   Nov-20-10 08:20 PM   #14 
  - Paranoid NOT! "Paper ballots for recounts and auditing" = bait and switch!  Bill Bored   Nov-19-10 12:47 AM   #9 
     - Okay, how much knowledge do you have about statistics and the Board of Elections?  TheWraith   Nov-19-10 03:25 AM   #10 
        - Thanks for being a poll watcher but the 3% audit is bullshit. Read and learn:  Bill Bored   Nov-20-10 12:37 AM   #12 
           - Your link is irrelevant.  TheWraith   Nov-21-10 02:28 AM   #16 
              - 3% Audits are ok  BeFree   Nov-21-10 09:42 AM   #17 
              - that isn't "what the experts all say" at all  OnTheOtherHand   Nov-21-10 07:57 PM   #19 
                 - well  BeFree   Nov-21-10 09:32 PM   #22 
                    - A 10% audit of each and every machine...  Bill Bored   Nov-21-10 09:44 PM   #24 
                    - 90% confidence  BeFree   Nov-21-10 10:18 PM   #25 
                       - Your math is not right for all elections because 10% is not right for all elections.  Bill Bored   Nov-21-10 11:34 PM   #26 
                          - well Bill  BeFree   Nov-22-10 12:24 PM   #28 
                             - It's not simple and not doable. If it were, someone would do it.  Bill Bored   Nov-23-10 12:42 AM   #31 
                    - OK, now I know what you're talking about  OnTheOtherHand   Nov-22-10 07:00 AM   #27 
              - actually, think about this some more  OnTheOtherHand   Nov-21-10 07:53 PM   #18 
              - You are not very well informed. Try this:  Bill Bored   Nov-21-10 09:13 PM   #20 
              - You're the one who clearly doesn't understand how a 3% audit works.  TheWraith   Nov-22-10 10:18 PM   #29 
                 - Dude, sorry to break this news to you but NY Election Law says to audit 3% of SCANNERS! nt  Bill Bored   Nov-23-10 12:28 AM   #30 
                    - Crickets. nt  Bill Bored   Nov-27-10 01:28 AM   #32 
                    - definitely NY needs better audits if using computer vote counting  WillYourVoteBCounted   Nov-27-10 07:30 AM   #33 
                       - As I understand it, NC does full hand counts for the closest races.  Bill Bored   Nov-27-10 10:17 PM   #34 
                          - there's an IF in here  WillYourVoteBCounted   Nov-28-10 09:35 PM   #35 
                             - It seems hard to get if it relies on finding problems in a 3% sample.  Bill Bored   Nov-29-10 02:09 AM   #36 
              - More links (this time from the American Statistical Association):  Bill Bored   Nov-21-10 09:34 PM   #23 
  - low turnout a really bad idea. Consider Bell, California  WillYourVoteBCounted   Nov-18-10 03:03 PM   #6 
  - oh oh!  WillYourVoteBCounted   Nov-18-10 11:55 AM   #2 
 

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