|
I agree with Sophia. We have
little control over the type of pen that gets used for marking ballots.
Bleed through is always a possibility even if the voter doesn't use a
Sharpie. GEMS should restrict the placement of ovals back to
back.
Ian
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 1:05
PM
Subject: RE: Ovals positioned back to
back on ballots.
Since Global does not have a mandatory requirement on marking
instruments
for the ballots, customers may choose pens other than the
Global
recommendations (Eberhart Faber) for economic reasons. Like
the Sharpies,
those pens may cause bleed through on certain type of
paper. To avoid any
sort of "bleed through" problem, I believe
that the solution be handled in
GEMS.
Perhaps, we should suggest
that it be handled in GEMS as well as removing
the Sharpies from the list
of approved ballot marking instruments.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Tyler [mailto:tyler@dieboldes.com]
Sent: Monday,
November 22, 1999 10:11 AM
To: sophia@dieboldes.com; Request For
Change
Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
I have
been aware for some time (from personal experience) that Sharpie pens
cause
bleed through on ballots and could cause a problem if ovals on the
front
and back were ever back to back.
How about if we remove Sharpie pens
from the list of approved ballot marking
instruments and train our
customers not to use Sharpie pens? This seems
like the easy, low-tech
solution.
Tyler
-----Original Message-----
From: Sophia Lee
<sophia@dieboldes.com>
To: Request
For Change <rcr@dieboldes.com>
Date:
Monday, November 22, 1999 11:53 AM
Subject: Ovals positioned back to back
on ballots.
>RCR: sl-112099-01
>Requested: November 20,
1999
>Required: December 15 1999
>County: King County,
WA
>Election: February 29, 2000
>
>The election in King
County on November 2, 1999 went well. However, we did
>have a
"bleed-through" problem from the Sharpie Pens.
>There were a lot of
races and issues in this November election resulting in
>some 450 ballot
styles. Unfortunately, a couple of the ovals on
the
Seattle
>ballots were back to back. Some of the marks on
the front of the ballot
>bled through to the ovals on the back of the
ballots causing a race on the
>back to register as over-votes.
This was detected and corrected within 2
>hours of the opening of the
polls.
>Since Sharpies are still approved ballot marking instruments
(according to
>Ian), request that GEMS automatically detect if the ovals
for any ballot
are
>back to back and either
>a) provide an
exception report identifying the ballot styles with back to
>back ovals
or
>b) automatically adjust the oval column for the
ballot.
|