Do you have any actual evidence or research to back up that, in my opinion, rather bold position?
- Chris -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Olson Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:59 PM To: election-methods@electorama.com Subject: Re: [EM] Cost of Manual Counting vs. Machine Counting I think this reinforces my position that the current best mix of speed, reliability, trustworthiness and cost is to have people reading ballots punching data into common desktop computers. Assuming the recognition is correct, missed kepresses should be relatively rare, and there can be redundant counting for that and other reasons. A $500-$1000 PC can be used for data entry and then after the election returned to other service in whatever branch of government counts the election. So, that cost can be practically negligible (some IT time wrangling the machines). Desktop/Server software is more common and easier to do in an Open way than embedded software for a special purpose voting machine. More people can write it, more people can read it and check it. And of course having the computer do the final processing makes IRV/STV/IRNR/whatever-else-election-methods-nerds-dream-up feasible and even easy. On the one hand, it's always good to have a hand-countable fall back, but I think I'd rather move forward and make sure the computer methods are good. If we somehow loose the ability to have computers do the counting, we probably have bigger problems to worry about. Brian Olson http://bolson.org/ On Fri, 25 May 2007, James Gilmour wrote: >> Brian Olson > Sent: 25 May 2007 16:34 >> In most estimates that I think are reasonable, machines come out bad to >> very bad. Unless you think it's worth paying the premium price for fast >> election night returns. > > It does also depend on the voting system you are using and the version of the rules for that voting > system you are using. In Northern Ireland the STV counting rules specify the Gregory Method for > transferring surplus votes. In that method most ballot papers are sorted and counted only once. In > Scotland the STV counting rules specified the Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method for transferring > surplus votes. In that method a high proportion of the ballot papers may have to be sorted and > counted several times over. Quite apart from the time taken in repeated sorting and counting, there > are logistical issues about making sure all the differently valued ballot papers are kept separate > and are handled correctly. It can be done by hand, but it is certainly much quicker and easier by > computer. What caused the delays in the recent Scottish elections was the unexpected large numbers > of ballot papers that were submitted for adjudication after scanning, many of which were OK but not > completely within the high level spec set for automatic processing. > > James Gilmour > > ---- > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info > ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
