A poll worker in Pennsylvania (mostly apolitical)

"Just Jeepin'" (macintux)
11/10/2020 at 14:00 • Filed to: None

This shouldn’t be political, and please don’t make it so, although I’m sure the police interactions will raise an eyebrow or two . It’s a look at the redundancies and fail-safes in place, and weaknesses in the overall process, from the perspective of one particularly tech-savvy person based on his local experiences helping out.

https://portal.drewdevault.com/2020/11/10/2020-Election-worker.gmi

DISCUSSION (14)

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:16

Thanks for sharing.

ShrimpHappens, née WJalopy > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:18

EDIT: Redacted snarky comment to abide by your desire for keeping this non-political.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:26

I feel like there’s a way more efficient way of doing that, I dunno

Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:29

Interesting. That was very informative and reassuring about the levels of redundancy built in.

Just Jeepin' > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
11/10/2020 at 14:32

I suspect for the most part efficiency is not the goal. Past a certain point efficiency looks a lot like “centralized point where votes can be quietly changed”.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:36

It reads more like their state has a strict and antiquated protocol for the tallying of votes written into their constitution, which does not translate well to the 21st century, and this is the result. There’s a lot of intentional redundancy on there. Personally, I’m not much of a fan of the use of highly specialized electronic equipment for the purposes of the vote. It takes a lot of trial and error to get most devices functioning correctly, enough that a machine that gets used on average a few times at most per year would be very prone to malfunction.

Just Jeepin' > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
11/10/2020 at 14:37

I’m fervently opposed to any electronic voting system that doesn’t include a paper version of each vote that can be used during a recount , which we saw a lot more of during the 2000 election cycle. I think states have moved away from that, but I’m not sure.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 14:43

It’s still such a new and poorly tested technology.

In Ohio (at least where I live) it went like this:

Present ID/mail to get a ballot, sign a receipt, take the ballot to a voting station, insert the ballot, ballot scans a barcode, on a touch screen, make your choices, hit “vote”, the ballot gets spit back out with appropriate bubbles filled in. Double check that those are what you’d wanted, take it over to a scanner thingy, put it in, I assume it ends up in the hopper, get your sticker and leave. That seems somewhat stream lined, but I don’t know how the information gets tabulated and whatnot.

Chariotoflove > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 15:03

I’m not clear on why the hoodie described in the police officer was considered political speech. I would think it unprofessional while on duty, but presumably people of all parties wears American flag clothing and take the oath of service in the military. There must be something missing.

My impression of voting where I am is that it is equally secure, or close to. The only logical way I can think of to enact fraud , short of a sophisticated conspiracy, would be to cast fraudulent ballots, such as a person submitting a vote that is not their own ( before election day seems the most likely way to do it) or to find a way to vote more than once. Still, you’d have to have a lot of that going on to make a difference, I would think.

I’m asked to show my picture ID, and I also have my registration card. I think that’s reasonable, and gives me a high level of faith that no shenanigans will happen because I think polls are run just like they are supposed to be.

notsomethingstructural > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
11/10/2020 at 15:05

People can’t simultaneously complain that the vote tabulating process is redundant AND also lax, insecure, and/or rigged. Everyone should want redundancy and chain of custody for a secure election, for one day a year max idgaf how many extra man-hours it takes to follow good protocols

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > notsomethingstructural
11/10/2020 at 15:20

Yup. The methodology outlined here seems pretty ripe for mistakes, fraud, and scrutiny.

The fact that an “erase media” button exists... wow.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 16:09

We’re long past the point of being able to employ “secure authentication” of every voter and “secure validation” of every ballot. The fact that every attempt to improve this process is immediately labeled “voter suppression” shows you why this is still a thing— 20 years after that shitshow in Florida.

There are reports of “ballot tallies” being delivered on Thumbdrives— for anybody even remotely aware of system integrity? that should scare the hell out you.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Just Jeepin'
11/10/2020 at 16:11

If WalMart can sell me 1000 checks with secure ID in holograms and thermal encoding? We can sure secure the vote with non-hackable, non-duplicable paper— which is immediately scanned and kept as archive.

The tech exists to do this right. What we lack is commitment to secure elections.

Just Jeepin' > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish
11/10/2020 at 16:25

The fact that every attempt to improve this process is immediately labeled “voter suppression” shows you why this is still a thing

Thank you for abiding by my request to keep this apolitical.