At 10:27 PM 21/07/2016, Chris Maltby wrote: >The other audit capability is the (incomplete) counts of senate >first preferences by group that was conducted manually in polling >booths on election night. This data is available for statistical >comparison with the booth-by-booth final vote data and that would >also show up any significant favouritism in the data entry process.
I was going to suggest this as a QA measure: sample a subset of the votes in each machine to test accuracy. That wouldn't be too onerous and I suspect scrutineers would accept that as a reasonable demonstration of the reliability of the software. In fact, I would push for this on every OCR/computer combination used for the final count. Anyone who has used it knows how OCR is UNreliable. If this is supposed to be interpreting the full spectrum of hand-written numbers, I would be questioning things as well. We're not talking about a binary tick or unticked box. Think how the US got into strife with the hanging chad fiasco in Florida and how Al Gore did not become president of the US as a result. This feels worse...... Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [email protected] Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker Blog: www.janwhitaker.com Some psychopaths become serial killers, and other psychopaths become prosecutors. - Bob Ruff, Truth and Justice, June 2016 Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
