Having worked as an election judge in Maryland......how do I know that when the button for candidate X was pressed, the machine actually recored it for X. I don't know. No one knows.
I'm curious. Does your position as
an election judge require you to
``sign off'' on the election in any
way? If you have to sign something
to verify your part of the election
process, what is it that you assert
was done correctly?
I wonder if an election judge revolt
on the subject could ever have any
impact. "You want me to sign that
the tally in our precinct is correct?
Sorry, can't do that; no one can."
Say what you want about Clinton or Regan, they both inspired people, and both convinced the majority of voters (not tiny contestable majority either) to get the job.
FWIW (and it's not worth much), Clinton did not receive a majority of the popular vote in either of his Presidential elections. He won a majority of the Electoral College each time, which is exactly what he needed to do to win, but in each race there was no popular vote majority due to significant votes case for a third party, Ross Perot's Reform Party.
Because my focus was on things that can be done
in time for the general election in November.
A move to all paper ballots would be fine
with me. An improved partially electronic
system with a paper trail would be even better, but
the MD Senate blocked it.
Like it or hate it, the existing election
law in MD calls for an electronic election.
That's not going to change before November.
The silver lining is that the existing
system already supports some paper ballots
in some situations. Incremental improvement
is to make sure those portions are well-supported
enough to work, and to expand them where possible.
Another possibility would be to expand
or encourage the use of the absentee ballot
system.
These are things that could be done. At this
stage we couldn't even get the equipment for
an all-paper election; let alone perform all
the re-training the law would call for.
At the very least each polling site should have enough paper provisional ballots at the ready to complete the election in case of complete machine failure. One of many problems in the recent primaries was an inadequate supply of provisional ballots to cover all the cases that led to their use.
Next step beyond that would be to permit any voter who wants it, to use one of the paper provisional ballots instead of using the voting machine.
How about telling kids "Abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy and STDs, and it'd be great if you practiced it. However, that's probably unrealistic, and so here are some ways to protect yourself if you do choose to have sex.
Would you accept a revision to your
proposal? Just drop the words in bold.
Telling students they are likely to fail has the
effect of actually making them more likely to fail.
Drop the abstinence defeatest attitude, if you're
really looking for a successful middle ground
proposal.
Keep in mind they do not bury the dead
in New Orleans. If flood waters flowed
through the above-ground tombs, of course
there are dead bodies out in the water
and on the streets, along with all the
other debris.
Think system wide and find the real flaw here. Are people really stupid to provide a handful of facts about themselves? Or are the banks stupid to accept a handful of facts as evidence of authorization to access an account?
Seems to me this whole "identity theft" is an exercise in blaming people for the banks' failures. I haven't had my "identity stolen" -- whatever that's supposed to mean. No, the bank has been tricked, defrauded into giving up my money to someone who happens to know my mother's maiden name. That's the bank's policies hurting the bank's ability to do its job -- keep my money safe. That's not my problem.
Calling it "identity theft" and holding me responsible for preventing it is just an attempt to turn the banks' problem into my problem -- one they are happy to help me solve for a fee of $10 a month.
No, thanks, I decline to pay a monthly fee to do the bank's work for it.
Perhaps you need some
perspective as well. Compare like
with like.
Will
your contributions be as
significant as the entire
class of teachers in the
abstract? Of course not.
Will they be as significant as any randomly
selected new teacher just out
of a School of Education? Almost
certainly yes.
Give yourself come credit. Most
starting teachers are morons. Experience
develops some of them into those teachers
that you are romanticizing. The rest don't
last 5 years.
It doesn't change your point, but
Justice Kennedy was nominated by
President Reagan after Robert Bork
failed confirmation and Douglas
Ginsberg withdrew from the confirmation
process.
The anonymous coward is incorrect. The
opinions (majority, concurring, and
dissenting) are
online for anyone who
wants to know what they really do say.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? RFC 1178.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1178.html
Wonder joints!
Sounds a lot like the God is still speaking campaign.
Funny how the new things God has to say are just the things someone was wishing He might say.
Having worked as an election judge in Maryland... ...how do I know that when the button for candidate X was pressed, the machine actually recored it for X. I don't know. No one knows.
I'm curious. Does your position as an election judge require you to ``sign off'' on the election in any way? If you have to sign something to verify your part of the election process, what is it that you assert was done correctly?
I wonder if an election judge revolt on the subject could ever have any impact. "You want me to sign that the tally in our precinct is correct? Sorry, can't do that; no one can."
Say what you want about Clinton or Regan, they both inspired people, and both convinced the majority of voters (not tiny contestable majority either) to get the job.
FWIW (and it's not worth much), Clinton did not receive
a majority of the popular vote in either of his Presidential
elections. He won a majority of the Electoral College each
time, which is exactly what he needed to do to win, but
in each race there was no popular vote majority due to
significant votes case for a third party, Ross Perot's
Reform Party.
Because my focus was on things that can be done in time for the general election in November.
A move to all paper ballots would be fine with me. An improved partially electronic system with a paper trail would be even better, but the MD Senate blocked it.
Like it or hate it, the existing election law in MD calls for an electronic election. That's not going to change before November.
The silver lining is that the existing system already supports some paper ballots in some situations. Incremental improvement is to make sure those portions are well-supported enough to work, and to expand them where possible.
Another possibility would be to expand or encourage the use of the absentee ballot system.
These are things that could be done. At this stage we couldn't even get the equipment for an all-paper election; let alone perform all the re-training the law would call for.
At the very least each polling site should
have enough paper provisional ballots at the ready to complete the election in case of complete machine failure. One of many problems in the recent primaries was an inadequate supply of provisional ballots to cover all the cases that led to their use.
Next step beyond that would be to permit any voter who wants it, to use one of the paper provisional ballots instead of using the voting machine.
Would you accept a revision to your proposal? Just drop the words in bold.
Telling students they are likely to fail has the effect of actually making them more likely to fail. Drop the abstinence defeatest attitude, if you're really looking for a successful middle ground proposal.
The Slashdot summary is misleading.
That quote is from the article;
it is not from the judge.
The word "scandal" does not appear
in the judge's opinion.
The summary is misleading because it
quotes the article in such a way as to
appear to be quoting the judge's opinion.
The word "scandal" does not appear in
the judge's opinion.
The article itself is clear on the quoting,
but Slashdot editors should know how few
people RTFA, and avoid giving them the
wrong impression.
Mozilla on a Solaris box.
My assumption is that the browser
matters less than my local setting
that I prefer a minimum font size
of 18 pixels. ( I don't read
flyspeck.)
Still, isn't the ability to adapt
to such local preferences one of
the main alleged benefits of CSS?
Something somewhere's not getting
the job done.
If CSS (and SlashDot's use of it) is so
great, why am I being forced to horizontally
scroll every one of these questions?
Same contents, better formatting at
http://tmml.sourceforge.net/doc/tcl/open.html
A ``noisy'' political process is a characteristic of one where freedom of political speech is central, yes.
The problem here is with those willing to trade away that freedom in exchange for a slight reduction in the noise level.
Keep in mind they do not bury the dead in New Orleans. If flood waters flowed through the above-ground tombs, of course there are dead bodies out in the water and on the streets, along with all the other debris.
Think system wide and find the real
flaw here. Are people really stupid
to provide a handful of facts about
themselves? Or are the banks stupid
to accept a handful of facts as
evidence of authorization to access
an account?
Seems to me this whole "identity theft"
is an exercise in blaming people for the
banks' failures. I haven't had my
"identity stolen" -- whatever that's
supposed to mean. No, the bank has been
tricked, defrauded into giving up my
money to someone who happens to know my
mother's maiden name. That's the bank's
policies hurting the bank's ability to
do its job -- keep my money safe. That's
not my problem.
Calling it "identity theft" and holding
me responsible for preventing it is just
an attempt to turn the banks' problem into
my problem -- one they are happy to help
me solve for a fee of $10 a month.
No, thanks, I decline to pay a monthly
fee to do the bank's work for it.
No, you'll leave it for some other pedant.
Will your contributions be as significant as the entire class of teachers in the abstract? Of course not.
Will they be as significant as any randomly selected new teacher just out of a School of Education? Almost certainly yes.
Give yourself come credit. Most starting teachers are morons. Experience develops some of them into those teachers that you are romanticizing. The rest don't last 5 years.
Become a judge, then refuse to verify the count unless in good conscience you really have the means to do so.
It doesn't change your point, but Justice Kennedy was nominated by President Reagan after Robert Bork failed confirmation and Douglas Ginsberg withdrew from the confirmation process.
Maybe this will put an end to
all that nonsense talk about
a "digital divide" then?
Neither did John McCain, but it didn't stop him.
The anonymous coward is incorrect. The opinions (majority, concurring, and dissenting) are online for anyone who wants to know what they really do say.
What's wrong with that? Mixing GPL'd code with proprietary (that is, non-GPL) code is a no-no.
If they did not know that already, it's good to learn it.