Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
...
|
| ES&S M100 ballot rejection/DAC proble... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 525
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 6:03 am: | 
|
A quick heads up to a very thorough and interesting report provided by Jill LaVine, ROV in Sacramento County, CA. They opted to send ballots to central counting when --during L&A conducted after preventative maintenance -- inconsistencies in ballot acceptance were found.
NOTE: here's a link to the first document -- it's posted in a series of posts, one after another, in this California news story thread:
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/show.cgi?tpc=8&post=44318#POST44318
ES&S says that DAC calibration is not part of PM, even though it is in a generic list of PM items in an ES&S M100 manual posted here at BBV, so help in clarifying when/why/how often the DAC calibration is checked would be useful to know.
The report cites inexperienced techs doing work on the machines, and also the fact that ES&S had made a ballot printing spec update that quite a few customers didn't appear to have received. It was critical in unraveling why the ballots in this election were rejected, when they weren't in the past.
If for no other reason, read this report because the persistence, care in researching and writing, and clearcut recommendations for the future are imho a definite model that we can only hope others emulate. |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 988
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, September 15, 2008 - 6:43 am: |
|
OK, here is the document quoted in the link just above, but in its entirety. It is possible that other ES&S machines may have characteristics that overlap the problems that Sacramento County, CA had with the M100 (an optical scanner that reads voters' marked choices).
The document is also an excellent model for troubleshooting -- see how they thought through the possible source of the issue, confirmed or eliminated them, and then worked to a multifaceted permanent resolution. The county understands pretty exactly how the problem occurred, and they address every single angle of it they can think of.
Note also that the vendor didn't necessarily just come in and save the day. The election staff had to roll up their sleeves and engage with the problem, not just hold out their arms and say, "Help, I'm drowning in a technical problem."
ONe can always find things they didn't do, but they DID do a great deal here. I asked Jill LaVine if I could post this document because I think ultimately, it will be very helpful to some other election official, at some time. (Only example I know of where officials said it helped: New Bedford, MA, September 08).
|
Tom Borawski
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Tomb
Post Number: 32
Registered: 5-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 17, 2008 - 4:55 pm: |
|
I wonder how the vendor justifies their stance that DAC calibration is not part of PM ? It is an analog component- voltage references drift. Interesting. |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 1000
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, September 17, 2008 - 7:19 pm: |
|
I don't know Tom, but I checked the manual an dit is on the list in the ES&S M100 manual as included in the PM, but they said it wasn't. Registrar was not satisfied with the quality of the techs who did the PM, and I pointed out to her that what the vendor said was in conflict with what the manual says is included in PM.
Isn't included (i.e., is not part of the package), or wasn't included (i.e., the PM tech screwed up and didn't do it?)
If anyone having this issue reads this thread, at least they will know what has happened in other situations. |
Tom Borawski
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Tomb
Post Number: 33
Registered: 5-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2008 - 4:08 pm: |
|
The county should have schematics and source code so their chief engineer could evaluate the situation.
Sorry-- lost my head there.... |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 1002
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2008 - 5:17 pm: |
|
It's okay Tom, it happens to the best of us, but thankfully, such moments of sanity are fleeting and you'll be okay shortly. |
|
|
SACRAMENTO COUNTY: M100 ballot rejection troubleshooting explanation