Observing logic and accuracy testing, what to look for or ask?

[GuvWurld]

The small town of Fortuna, CA is having a local election in April, in advance of the state primaries in June. Tomorrow the Humboldt County elections department will be doing logic and accuracy testing. This is open to the public. If you are in the area, you can go to 3033 H St. in Eureka at 2pm.

I've observed this once before and left with more questions that I had at the beginning. I wonder what this board recommends I look out for or ask about while I'm there?

Keep in mind I have a testy relationship with our elections manager because he continues to flat out lie and say there is nothing wrong with Diebold OS scanners, tests showing otherwise are bullshit for one reason or another, and they are not illegal. It would be very easy for me to be confrontational with him but that isn't smart and not what I intend.

I do hope some media will be present and then perhaps I can create "enough rope" for him to hang himself. But even beyond that, what do you want to know that maybe I can only tell you if I make it to this tomorrow?

[Land Shark]

1. I'd let you use MY adding machine, so CAN I DO MY OWN L&A test?

Logic and accuracy testing is so much more than the pathetic motions they will go through - with real software testing it is a battery of legitimate tests. They pick out one little demonstration and call that L&A testing. That's like taking the legal quiz in your local paper and calling it a "BAR EXAM"

[GuvWurld]

2. You see, now this is the type of confrontational attitude

that I just don't need help with. My instinct is to ask "so is this the room in which Diebold installed the uncertified software?" Uh-huh. "And can you tell me where you were standing when that was taking place?"

OR

"Can you pin-point for us the exact moment when the interpreter code translates this data into Diebold's proprietary AccuBasic code?" Right, mm-kay. "Now that the information is not readable by humans, the fact that it will spit out results that match the dozen test ballots is basically three card monte. You show us that it works fine now but that is absolutely no guarantee that it will work fine on election day. And if you want us to believe that the non-human readable data will always match the results reported well then you are asking for our blind trust. Oh, sorry, was there supposed to be another question in there?"