Al Franken...is this for real? - Page 12

Clodfobble · 02-12-2009, 06:13 PM

No, someone accidentally mentioned her name way earlier in the thread in a list of other people who were banned--OC herself was never banned, she just disappeared for awhile.

richlevy · 02-16-2009, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

No, someone accidentally mentioned her name way earlier in the thread in a list of other people who were banned--OC herself was never banned, she just disappeared for awhile.

Sort of 'evolution in action'.

Points to anyone who can name the sci-fi story that used that phrase (I can't remember the title).

classicman · 02-12-2009, 06:55 PM

Oh, that s right tw was citing OC as an example - thanks.

Urbane Guerrilla · 02-16-2009, 10:56 PM

Oath Of Fealty, by Niven & Pournelle. "Think of it as evolution in action," as a graffito near a ledge popular with jumpers in the arcology.

It's gotta be twenty years at least since I read it, and I had to google.

tw · 02-20-2009, 02:34 AM

Examples of why voters make vote counting so difficult - from The Economist:

classicman · 02-20-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

Examples of why voters make vote counting so difficult - from The Economist:

Of course they are both voters for Franken -no wonder they couldn't follow the directions....

JUST KIDDING

classicman · 02-20-2009, 09:04 AM

Where is the difficulty?

piercehawkeye45 · 02-20-2009, 09:50 AM

Completely fill in the bubble, do not use checks, x's, and do not make any other marks in other boxes.

It must be the North Dakota immigrants...

classicman · 02-20-2009, 11:58 AM

I got that PH, but seriously - is there ANY DOUBT about the intent of either of those ballots. I'm sure there are much better examples of confusion, but those two appear very clear.

piercehawkeye45 · 02-20-2009, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

I got that PH, but seriously - is there ANY DOUBT about the intent of either of those ballots. I'm sure there are much better examples of confusion, but those two appear very clear.

There is no doubt for anyone with common sense. There is doubt for politicians that are trying to win an election.

Shawnee123 · 02-20-2009, 11:59 AM

That's why that dude only got a 2 on his SAT...bubble filling challenged.

classicman · 02-20-2009, 01:12 PM

The ones in tw's link are quite clear - Those in the other link are pretty obvious too, for the most part. This seems like a bunch of BS to me.

Shawnee123 · 02-20-2009, 01:13 PM

Clearly you've never dealt with the general public in matters of forms and publications...you'd be amazed!

tw · 02-20-2009, 03:03 PM

If the machine cannot read it, then it is not obvious and must be reviewed.

Better voting machines read your ballot, tell you what it could not read, and ask you if that mistake is OK.

Obviously, MN has better voting machines than those bought by bean counter intelligence who saw the word 'computer' and then knew it must be better (ie customers of Diebold).

But do MN voting machines ask the voter if that is what he intended? If yes, then the reason to accept or reject a paper ballot completely changes. It has a check mark. The voting machine says that entry for Senator is empty. The voter says yes. Then the check mark is a blank - voter voted for nobody. If the machine sees he voted, then says nothing - machine accepts the check mark as a vote. No problem. No challenge.

We don't know if voting machines read and asked the voter about vague intents. Therefore we don't know the criteria used to recount those votes. Not at all obvious until we first know if machines asked voters about vague intents.

Shawnee123 · 02-20-2009, 03:10 PM

Still, you can't un-stupidfy people.

There is an edit when filling out the fafsa when the student enters taxes paid as equal to adjusted gross income (say they made 25000, and they enter that they paid 25000 in taxes.) A box pops up and says "dude, you just said you paid out your entire income in taxes. Are you really sure?" More often than not, they will say "yes, I'm sure...hmph." Then again "are you surely sure?" "YES I'm surely sure you damn computer." Then they bitch when selected by the feds for verification.

I can't imagine voters are a smarter population, on the average, than students.

02-12-2009, 06:13 PM	#1
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	No, someone accidentally mentioned her name way earlier in the thread in a list of other people who were banned--OC herself was never banned, she just disappeared for awhile. __________________ My book My other book My spirit animal

02-12-2009, 06:55 PM	#3
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Oh, that s right tw was citing OC as an example - thanks. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-16-2009, 10:56 PM	#4
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Oath Of Fealty, by Niven & Pournelle. "Think of it as evolution in action," as a graffito near a ledge popular with jumpers in the arcology. It's gotta be twenty years at least since I read it, and I had to google. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

02-20-2009, 02:34 AM	#5
tw Read? I only know how to write. Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 11,933	Examples of why voters make vote counting so difficult - from The Economist: Attached Images

02-20-2009, 09:04 AM	#7
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Where is the difficulty? __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-20-2009, 09:50 AM	#8
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	Completely fill in the bubble, do not use checks, x's, and do not make any other marks in other boxes. It must be the North Dakota immigrants... __________________ I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all.

02-20-2009, 11:58 AM	#9
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	I got that PH, but seriously - is there ANY DOUBT about the intent of either of those ballots. I'm sure there are much better examples of confusion, but those two appear very clear. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-20-2009, 11:59 AM	#11
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	That's why that dude only got a 2 on his SAT...bubble filling challenged. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

02-20-2009, 01:12 PM	#12
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	The ones in tw's link are quite clear - Those in the other link are pretty obvious too, for the most part. This seems like a bunch of BS to me. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

02-20-2009, 01:13 PM	#13
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	Clearly you've never dealt with the general public in matters of forms and publications...you'd be amazed! __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

02-20-2009, 03:03 PM	#14
tw Read? I only know how to write. Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 11,933	If the machine cannot read it, then it is not obvious and must be reviewed. Better voting machines read your ballot, tell you what it could not read, and ask you if that mistake is OK. Obviously, MN has better voting machines than those bought by bean counter intelligence who saw the word 'computer' and then knew it must be better (ie customers of Diebold). But do MN voting machines ask the voter if that is what he intended? If yes, then the reason to accept or reject a paper ballot completely changes. It has a check mark. The voting machine says that entry for Senator is empty. The voter says yes. Then the check mark is a blank - voter voted for nobody. If the machine sees he voted, then says nothing - machine accepts the check mark as a vote. No problem. No challenge. We don't know if voting machines read and asked the voter about vague intents. Therefore we don't know the criteria used to recount those votes. Not at all obvious until we first know if machines asked voters about vague intents.

02-20-2009, 03:10 PM	#15
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	Still, you can't un-stupidfy people. There is an edit when filling out the fafsa when the student enters taxes paid as equal to adjusted gross income (say they made 25000, and they enter that they paid 25000 in taxes.) A box pops up and says "dude, you just said you paid out your entire income in taxes. Are you really sure?" More often than not, they will say "yes, I'm sure...hmph." Then again "are you surely sure?" "YES I'm surely sure you damn computer." Then they bitch when selected by the feds for verification. I can't imagine voters are a smarter population, on the average, than students. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)