Would it help to write down the serial number of the voting machine

[soothsayer]

if you're using a touch-screen type that does not have a paper trail?

I just noticed that Arlington County VA will use WINvote touch-scren machines in the election, so I watched their online Powerpoint presentation on how to use it and on the first screen it looks like there's a serial number, and also some counters.

Would it be useful to write down the unit serial number and the public counter and protective counter numbers? Maybe it could be used later to verify accuracy, etc., should the question arise?

Here's the link if anyone wants to see the ppt pres
http://www.co.arlington.va.us/Departments/VoterRegistration/VoterRegistrationNews.aspx

I think I'll go ahead and write it down IF I remember to bring a pen and paper...can't hurt to do it.

Also, I'm going to whisper to it Look, I know you may have been programmed to cheat, but don't do it---just go ahead and report the honest votes. (seriously! that can't hurt, either...)

[rfranklin]

1. Having a serial number would prove nothing...

Other than you saw a voting machine with that serial number.

That is the beauty of the BBV machines. No paper trail. No accountability. Whatever the election officials say the result is, that is the result.

[soothsayer]

2. But even if it proved I voted at such and such machine for vote number

whatever the counter says....wouldn't that prove anything, if I knew how I voted?

[mia]

3. There's a paper trail of sorts.

I was a poll watcher on August 31st in Florida. At the end of the day the data was collected from all of the machines and printed out in one record.
Individual voters weren't listed, but the numbers from each party and who they voted for was. One copy of the results was posted on the precinct office door before we left. Two others were printed for other records. They printed out an extra one for me to keep as a souvenir. "It's all public record", the election supervisor said.

[Boredtodeath]

5. Hey, mia, take it to the next step for me, please

Now that you have your precinct report, try to confirm that what your report says was actually the number certified by the state as the official results.

Find out if your souvenir matches the official number or if it is a worthless piece of paper.

I don't know the answer - I'm honestly curious what you will find out.

[mia]

9. Have been looking for the published numbers

but can't find them online yet.

They should be there. I remember looking up my own precinct after the March primary to see how the vote went. I should have bookmarked the site.

I'll keep working on it.

[renegade000]

4. i wouldn't worry about Arlington, VA

we're strongly democratic enough that people would seriously wonder if Bush took a majority here.

[Boredtodeath]

6. Actually, no, it wouldn't help. Here's why.

Your vote isn't stored on the machine, but on a memory card. The serial number that might matter would be the one on the card, but I doubt that's displayed anywhere.

[napi21]

7. Serical # and counter wouldn't help, but something else might!

At the end of the day, the voting info is combined from all the machines from each precinct, and printed out on a master list. Those results are then published at the precinct. The totals are then transmitted to the state headquarters to combine results for the state. I can't remember where I heard this, but it makes sense, if there is going to be any fraud perpetrated, it would be done at the state level, not the precinct. Certainly there should be a comparison made between the tallies from each precinct to the final combined totals reported by the state. Obviously, the local totals by individual differ from the combined totals at the state, there's a problem that need to be, and CAN BE researched, identified, and corrected!

I was an accountant for 40 years. This is done all the time! It wouldn't preclude software problems at the local precints, or individual machines, but I seriously doubt there is going to be that kind of fraud. If there is an attempt, it would be soo much easier, faster, and easier to accomplish at the point where all individual #'s are combined.

[Boredtodeath]

8. But....there's a problem with that method

If the individual cards are left unaltered, a "recount" would show the error.

A recount involves reloading the data from each individual card used in the race being recounted.

The manipulation/fraud must alter the original card for the evidence to disappear.

[napi21]

10. You're back to a tremendous amount of individual detail fraud.

I didn't say it can't happen, I said it's unlikely bacause it's simply not a realistic thing to do. It would require the coordination of far too many people, and the more people you involve in a crime, the greater the risk of being caught! It actually accomplish a sucessful fraudulent voting report, you would need coordination of maybe one or two people in maybe 10 states at the most. Have it all done in the final data submitted to the federal data collection point. You can find 20 people to coordinate a crime with a much reduced risk of "cold feet", guilty concience, or accidental slopiness.

I still can't see the logic in trying to do ANYTHING at the precinct level.

[Boredtodeath]

12. No, you don't need an army

It's really simple to alter each card permanently with one person sitting at a computer affecting the entire precinct and multiple precincts.

While the accumulation is in process, each card is in the machine, hooked up to a phone line BEFORE the results are modemed in.

One person, one machine, one modem, click, click, click, evidence gone.

[mia]

11. disappearing evidence

The manipulation/fraud must alter the original card for the evidence to disappear.

We'll need a platoon of actvists armed with portable scanners to gather the evidence from every precinct door before that happens.

http://www.planon.com/

[Boredtodeath]

13. Simple method

One person at every precinct with a blackberry to enter the numbers from the door.

The easier method is to do open records requests for a copy of the original report - more than one copy is run and in some states the report must be signed by the poll manager.