[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: Ballot Station v4.0.11 "anomaly"

Hi Lesley,

There was no Error Message received for this problem that occurred on
Election Night.  The transferring of the results to the GEMS host computer
went through without any error messages displaying a problem.  The problem,
as Tab wrote up in the e-mail that Frank sent out to Connie, is that during
the direct transferring process, the information on the first Vote Center
that was transferred, was stored in the Cache memory of the AVTS unit, when
the second, or subsequent, Vote Center was inserted and then transferred,
the AVTS unit was then transferring those new totals, but with previously
stored Race ID's as well as the new Race ID's, and GEMS being confused,
simply put the totals into the Races where it thought the totals should go.

That is the best explanation that I can give you.  For a better and clearer
picture, you will have to refer to Ken or Tab.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bugtrack@dieboldes.com [mailto:owner-bugtrack@dieboldes.com]On Behalf
Of Lesley Thompson
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 2:31 PM
To: BugTrack@dieboldes.com
Cc: stevem; barry
Subject: Ballot Station v4.0.11 "anomaly"

Jeff Hintz, Ken, Tab, or Robert Chen...

What were the ballot station error code messages that were received during
the central upload of the election day vote centers?  Johnson County still
has questions and I am trying to finalize the Report of Findings.  Also, can
you explain to me what the statement:

 "This problem only occurred when the second, or subsequent, Vote Centers
being uploaded during the same transmission session, had the same Race as a
previously uploaded Vote Center."

And, why would the Leawood Mayor's race, which was not on any of the vote
center PC cards uploading centrally, end up with errant votes?  And, where
did the 300 votes go that were not accounted for in the initially released

Can someone draw me a picture?

Thanks!  Les