Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kazan on November 19, 2003, 02:29:22 pm
-
one of the ripped messages from their internal forums that got hacked
"I need some answers! Our department is being audited by the County. I have been waiting for someone to give me an explanation as to why Precinct 216 gave Al Gore a minus 16022 when it was uploaded. Will someone please explain this so that I have the information to give the auditor instead of standing here "looking dumb". I would appreciate an explanation on why the memory cards start giving check sum messages. We had this happen in several precincts ..." (Source: "Memory card checksum errors (was: 2000 November Election)", support.w3archive/200101/msg00061.html, dated 18 January 2001) [/i]
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/34051.html
-
Way to repeat my thread half an hour later.:p
But yeah, it's really ****ing disturbing. And nobody here seems to care. Which is yet more disturbingness added on to the first layer.
I think we're seeing the elections of the future right here. And I'm getting the **** out to Canada. Yeech.
-
I care, just not right at this moment. I think I've broken my mind somehow today.
-
Isn't this proof it was rigged?
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Way to repeat my thread half an hour later.:p
But yeah, it's really ****ing disturbing. And nobody here seems to care. Which is yet more disturbingness added on to the first layer.
I think we're seeing the elections of the future right here. And I'm getting the **** out to Canada. Yeech.
Yeah, we've got no such worries. We know who our next Prime Minister is going to be in advance. :p :p Or rather, his chances of winning are so high its almost a sure bet. A fellow by the name of Paul Martin. But I hate to see Chretien go, he was an awesome PM.
-
Rictor, I wouldn't say that. Just because nobody's reported large-scale election fraud/problems doesn't mean they're not there. It could go both ways. The less we here about it means either:
1) No problems, or few problems.
2) A thorough cover up of something very, very bad.
We all hope that it is the first option. In any case, we should all take the election problems in the U.S. as a warning.
And yes, good old Mr. Martin does seem to be on his way to 24 Sussex Drive. It's so nearly a given that it's almost embarrassing!
-
for reference bush won by ~500 votes in florida... in otherwords he lost by 31544 votes if the administrators didn't correct the central DB
-
Um, except that the Diebold system wasn't in place then. Sure is now, though- it appears Bush knew what got him the election last time.
-
did you read the quote above, it was a diebold system they were talking about in that precint -- that mesage is from Diebold's internal support message board
-
bush won by ~500 votes,
margin of error > 500 votes (a lot >),
declairing vicory for ether side == bull****.
they should have just settled it with a frik'n roll of a dice or flip of a coin or something
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Um, except that the Diebold system wasn't in place then. Sure is now, though- it appears Bush knew what got him the election last time.
what won bush the election was the elctoral college. It was the Republican system at work, elections arnt decided by popular vote in this country (for good reason; but thats a whole different debate)
anyway, about nobody careing? I live in the state of GA. There were ppl *****in about this ALL over the state, for the reasons mentioned. for This system is to flawed to be used right now, and coupled with the stupidity of the voters (minoritys who cant read, and havent even had a high school education: sadyly, the majority of Georgians) its a recipe for disaster.
-
Drew: The electoral system was basically ignored by both sides until recently; it's only one of two times in history it's really mattered at all, and the other one is basically ancient history now. It isn't a Republican system, just a bad one, and one they're all for so long as it means they get their way. Which is pretty typical of politicos.
Kaz: Dunno what the story is there, but they just plain didn't have these systems in place during the 2000 election- they were adopted at the state level nationwide as a result of the election deal. Florida, at the time, used paper ballots. Possible they were doing a test run there and it went funky or something, I dunno.
Bob: Wouldn't that be nice? However, you and I know full well that it'd have ended up being a weighted die.
-
Stryke 9: some Diebold systems were in use during the Nov 2000 election
-
Originally posted by Stryke 9
It isn't a Republican system, just a bad one
let me clarify myself :)
I didnt mean the Republican party; i was refering to the electoral college and the republican method of government. either i didnt make my point clear enuf, ir you didnt understand. sry :)
-
ok, once again, how bloody hard is it to make a counter for 3 or 4 bloody options?
and if i understand correctly, each county votes, and then the vote of the county counts in the state polls, and then the state thing counts in the national thingy? so all the people of connetticut have the same amount of shared power as the population of Hawai? or did i get something wrong?
-
Kas: Pretty much, yeah. It's set up so that the states with fewer people get the same representation; why you'd want to put a small group of people on a level plane with a larger group whose major distinction is living a couple miles away is beyond me, but, well, politics.
-
your both refering to the electoral college. Perportiante to its poplulation, each state has a number of appointed officials that represent the state in the election. These electors look at the popular vote in the state and votefor the candidate the way their constituents are voting. It was set up to give all the states relativly equal say in the elections. If national elections were decided by popular vote only, states with smaller populations wouldnt get much say in the election. If you look at the 2000 election map, you can see that Gore controlled highly populated regions like New York and California and not many other states. Still, he had more popular votes than Bush did. In other words, if national elections were decided by popular vote, states with heavier populations would have much more say in the election than smaller states This is why the Founders set up the electoral college. Although Gore had the national majority vote, Bush controlled almost 2x the states than Gore did. Gore had the majorety of the population (a relative geographic sliver of the nation) but Bush controled the rest of the states and more electoral votes.
Popular vote summary (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm)
Popular vote map for Gore (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/goremap.htm)
Popular vote map for Bush (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/bushmap.htm)
Electoral Vote map (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecvotemap.htm)
Sumary of Electoral to Popular vote (http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm)
ok, that was long but i hope it increased your understanding why the election turnd out the way it did. Every state received the voice it deserved. :)
-
Hardly. It's been known to be thoroughly flawed for decades, in fact was meant to be anything but representational in the first pladce, it's just that nobody wants to touch it because it's Constitutional.
-
so far information hasnt been presented to prove that Stryke :)
-
Originally posted by Rictor
Yeah, we've got no such worries. We know who our next Prime Minister is going to be in advance. :p :p Or rather, his chances of winning are so high its almost a sure bet. A fellow by the name of Paul Martin. But I hate to see Chretien go, he was an awesome PM.
You sir, should be shot... Chretien is a boob... He could have left months ago, saved everyone a lot of trouble.. but no, he wanted to have a "farewell party" with the French PM...
They really should make a Survivor: Canada.
Give 12 people cars and make them drive across Canada, wearing "I voted Chretien" t-shirts and bumper stickers....
Last one alive wins....
They wouldnt make it out of BC...
-
So do you guys call him "Cretin"
haha i made a funny... *runs*
-
Originally posted by Kazan
did you read the quote above, it was a diebold system they were talking about in that precint -- that mesage is from Diebold's internal support message board
The article (at the end) refers to electronic voting being a good idea after the Florida debacle - i could have misread it though.
Anyways, it's not exacly a shock to find that the US voting system is corrupt. I'm just worried that the same thing could happen over here.
-
Corruption's one thing. The US has a long, proud history of basically nothing but corrupt elections. But this overt? That's awfully insulting to our collective intelligence, man.
-
I'm sure I've said this to you before Stryke: it's your ****ing country, grab a gun and do something about it.
-
aldo: *shakes head* read entire article
-
Originally posted by PhReAk
So do you guys call him "Cretin"
haha i made a funny... *runs*
chretien in french means christian.
"laughs at the implications" :p
On a side note, what are you all surprised about?
It's been known from day 1 that Bush didn't win in California. You know, proofs are cool, but when you KNOW already, well, there's no mean acting all surprised and stuff.
-
Originally posted by Kazan
aldo: *shakes head* read entire article
I did.
par example;
Diebold donated more than $195,000 to the Republican party in 2000 and 2001, and Walden W. O'Dell, the company's CEO, pledged in an invitation to a fund-raiser to deliver Ohio to George W. Bush in the next election.
The article clearly refers a crappy voting system which is in bed with the incumbent party.......and hence is allowed to escape with incompetence that threatens the validity of the whole electoral process.
But I'm more referring to a system that means anyone can stand for President - provided they can raise ~$500 million. Hence, you end with a country with a dodgily elected Persident (based on the result of a state ran by his brother) who made a lot of money from oil and which ends up attacking a country with one of the worlds largest oil reserves.
One where the costs of running are so high that the political parties are forced to toady up to big donors to afford to compete - and money buys influence.
And the problem is that it's starting to happen over here too...it's not so blatant, but that's because the Uk is just smaller and the figures aren't as big. The (admittedly utterly useful) leader of the Tory party was pretty much forced out by donors complaints, for example. not to mention the Bernie Ecclestone deal over tobacco sponsorship a while back.
-
DG: You have no idea how much I'd like to. But the odds are something like five million to one, with the entire ****ing rest of the country just sitting passively by unwilling to do jack **** about anything- it's not even that there's no chance of success that's keeping me from doing pretty much just what you say, that doesn't bother me, it's that it wouldn't even make an impression. The most an individual in this country can do is, say, kill a few hundred people (with a little planning and effort, it's not even that hard)- but that doesn't accomplish anything, the message rarely gets understood, and you've just made life worse for all around. Polticizing, stirring up trouble, going the whole Yippie route would be ideal, but it's far too easy for people to dismiss you as some lone nut and stop listening right off the bat- believe me, it happened once before.
Beh, one of these days I'll come across at least one person who's really ****ing alive, and cares enough to do something, and then we'll see if we can't change things. In the meantime, there's not a whole lot to do.
Plus it really kind of raises the question of whether there's any point. Most of the people I hear *****ing and remaining unwilling to do anything about the really bad **** here are the sort that'll have forgotten all about it with a couple more years of same. Doesn't really make you wanna help 'em, you know?
But hey, any volunteers?
-
aldo: you're still looking at the wrong part
-
Originally posted by Kazan
aldo: you're still looking at the wrong part
Well, correct me then & point to the part you're referring to - don't just sit there posting 'you're looking at the wrong part', cos that's no use to me.
-
THE DAMN QUOTE YOU BLOODY NITWIT
-
WHIT'S YER POINT, CALLER!?
In case you can't get it into your thick little skull, I was implying that the company in incompetent but escapes with it because they're in bed with the Government - i.e. corruption.
Woul;d you mind explaining what in that nice little quote of yours actually contradicts that?
Call me a nitwit and I'll break your ****ing neck, alright sunshine?
-
Apparently voting machines aren't the only crappy piece of equipment they make
Click me (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/34175.html)
-
Aldo: He's talking about the Florida bit- he still thinks they were around during the election, and tipped the scales there. They didn't, but try telling him that.
Kara: Ain't it great how towards the end they reassure people by saying that to hack into ATMs people would have to "go through a lot of juicier networks"? Wow, I sure feel like opening a bank account with that woman's company.
-
--deleted--
-
Deleted in response to me, or him? Should I be vaguely offended or not? :D
-
For the sake of clarity;
Maybe.