In article 90k3vl$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
AFAIK there is general agreement that unbiased humans are better at
identifying the difference between unpunched holes and imperfectly
punched holes than current counting machines -- which after all were
only
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Christian Bau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article 90k3vl$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
AFAIK there is general agreement that unbiased humans are better at
identifying the difference between unpunched holes and imperfectly
punched
Christian Bau wrote:
In article 90k3vl$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
AFAIK there is general agreement that unbiased humans are better at
identifying the difference between unpunched holes and imperfectly
punched holes than current counting machines --
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The message below is at:
http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/threadmsg_if.xp?AN=701156345fmt=text
Legal sophistry is truly amazing, especially the use of the phrase
"reasonable probability." This case has absolutely nothing to do
with
I specifically did not vote for some offices. I don't need the "psychic
friends" counters to guess how I wanted to vote. I refused to cast a
vote in these cases. It's not an "under vote" or an incorrect vote. It's
blank.
=
Fred Galvin wrote:
There is nothing *wrong* with "undervote" ballots. Voters are not
required to vote on every office and every question on the ballot.
Probably, *most* people who vote don't fill out their ballots
completely. Voters who choose not to vote for any of the candidates
for
"reasonable probability." This case has absolutely nothing to do
with statistics or with probability. It is a simple case of
arithmetic--look at the undervote ballots.
There is nothing *wrong* with "undervote" ballots. Voters are not
required to vote on every offic
The message below is at:
http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/threadmsg_if.xp?AN=701156345fmt=text
Legal sophistry is truly amazing, especially the use of the phrase
"reasonable probability." This case has absolutely nothing to do with
statistics or with probability. It is a simple case of
