10 Responses

1. 

   1)

   The Old Turk said on 3/11/2006 @ 4:50pm PT: [Permalink]

   E S & S,…. Election Systems & Software LLC,….

   You are fiddling with Democracy,…

   You have repeatedly proved yourselves incompetent

   Your quality control department is out to lunch-24/7

   Your voting equipment is unreliable & error prone

   You are test marketing a junk concept on us

   You are placing our cherished

   Democracy in jeopardy !!!!!!!!!

   GET LOST !!!!!!

   TAKE A HIKE !!!!!

   Practice your warped capitalism on somebody else.

   ditto : Diebold
   ditto : Sequoia

2. 

   2)

   The Old Turk said on 3/11/2006 @ 4:54pm PT: [Permalink]

   YOU DON"T OWN THIS GOVERNMENT,.. WE DO !

3. 

   3)

   Jeannie King said on 3/11/2006 @ 6:59pm PT: [Permalink]

   Take your machines and shove ’em!!I hope all you criminals end up in jail,along with Bush,Cheney,Rummy,Rice and the rest of these scumbags!!It’s time you realized,WE ARE TAKING OUR COUNTRY BACK, AND THERE’S NO STOPPING US NOW!!
   Rage on!

4. 

   4)

   Dredd said on 3/12/2006 @ 2:30am PT: [Permalink]

   The Tarrant County case is interesting. Both democrats and republicans are talking about a recount and suing for a recount.

   Wow … read what both sides are saying … and all of a sudden anyone should get the picture.

   The integrity of voting machines is a non-partisan issue and all parties should be overwhelmingly FOR PROVABLE RESULTS.

   But the ignorance of even those running for office and those conducting the elections is obvious.

   Not one mention of exit polls in the official dialogue yet. Little do they know that exit polls, done correctly, are a sure method for detecting fraud.

5. 

   5)

   gtash said on 3/12/2006 @ 4:52am PT: [Permalink]

   I say again: why are we buying voting machines as though they were weapons systems?

   Taxpayers are paying for questionable and unproven "prototypes", and then paying for their development, and then paying again for the patches and fixes. This is classic Pentagon contracting. It’s stupid for the Pentagon and it’s stupid for election boards.

6. 

   6)

   Floridiot said on 3/12/2006 @ 7:55am PT: [Permalink]

   It is not always the Companies building the equipments fault, I’ve worked government contracts before and they impose unrealistic rigid time and testing limits, with no extra for glitches, or you don’t get paid, and seen a couple go belly-up waiting to get paid, thats why it usually costs us taxpayers so much money for these contracts
   Because there are so many other companies to take their place, the one first in line usually throws out some junk so they get paid on time, then worry about how to fix it later, usually with a cash maintenance contract
   In this case, we got three or more throwing out junk hoping for the pot of gold at the end

   But this is too important to screw around with
   Dump all of it, hand counted paper for all

7. 

   7)

   Floridiot said on 3/12/2006 @ 8:17am PT: [Permalink]

   One Contractor we were working with on a new hospital
   We usually got paid like 85% for the major part of the work
   and you get the other 15% after the glitches are worked out
   Everyone else’s punch lists were like 10 pages long at the end of the job, this dudes list was about 500 pages long ! It looked like a novel
   When the "suits" got to him and asked him what he was going to do about his list, he looked at them, then flipped through the book, looked back at them and said
   "I’ll wait for the movie to come out", got up and walked out of the room, the look on the suits faces was priceless

8. 

   8)

   JohnDr said on 3/12/2006 @ 1:36pm PT: [Permalink]

   I have no idea what our government pays for a voting machine – too much I’m sure. But face it, given enough time a competent fourth grader could do the task on a regular office calculator costing less than ten bucks. It’s a simple math.

   [#4] Dredd’s comment about exit polling really suggests what we need. Two independent, parallel systems counting the vote simultaneously while the results are logged on a vote by vote basis on paper. The systems should not be developed by a single entity, but by two different ones. Forget about the voter receipt in case a recount is needed. It would be a nice thing to hand to the voter, but it’s too easy to defraud and to later make a receipt say what you (or someone else) wants it to say once it has been taken from the polling place. To eliminate the possibility of stealth hacks, the code running both systems should be delivered in source form and complied by election officials before being installed into the computers used to count the vote. The source code should then immediately become public record. Necessary compatibility testing between the developers should be overseen by a third party. Finally, the hardware that counts the vote should be as generic as possible, i.e. regular PC’s anyone could buy right down the street – nothing vendor specific. No chips, no ROM, no smart cards, no memory packs. If the vote is moved on external media that media should be Write once, CD or DVD.

   All the answers may not be outlined above, and it may seem more complicated than necessary, but the key point is that no ONE company should be given the responsibility for the whole shebang.

   I believe technology should be embraced, because if done right all types of fraud used previously (usually exploiting greed) could be virtually eliminated.

   Just my thoughts

9. 

   9)

   xupef3z@ebay.com said on 4/26/2006 @ 5:07pm PT: [Permalink]

   google pr main

10. 

    10)

    pralki said on 5/2/2006 @ 12:07am PT: [Permalink]

    Very good site. You are doing great job. Please Keep it up… .!