On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> For instance, for range voting, the equipment could count how many people
> gave each rating to candidate A, from a simple array of choices such as 0,
> 1, 50, 98, 99, or 100. Most choices are bunched near the ends of the scale,
> as this hel
The need for a computerized counting system depends not only on the
maximum number
of allowed ranks but on the number of candidates too. That does not
imply the need
of a centralized to do all the job. Local precincts can do some part of
the job before the
central gathers all the information
> From: Jameson Quinn
>
> New proposed section:
>
> Vote-counting details
> Most of our supported methods will require no updates to voting equipment,
> and all can be counted at the precinct level.
False claim. All of them require at least software updates and fully
ranking more than 3 candidate
ast call for edits to consensus statement (Jameson Quinn)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:33:14 -0600
> From: Jameson Quinn
> To: EM ,
> electionsciencefoundation
> Subject: [EM] Last call for edits to consensus statement
>
