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

# Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.

- To: "Request For Change" <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
- From: "Ian Piper" <ian@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:50:32 -0600
- References: <000201bf351c$82ff0250$5d398192@elec_sophia.metrokc.gov> <004a01bf35b8$68611270$5e03a8c0@globalelection.com> <383ABB1F.5E89089B@dieboldes.com>

Good point for Florida and the like, but not really of much interest to drier climes. But if we approve for one, we should approve for every one. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: Guy Lancaster To: Request For Change Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 10:04 AM Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots. Sharpie markers may have a bleed-through problem but they don't have the slow drying problem that the Berol markers have. When working in a very humid environment, marks made with Berol markers have been known to be wet when the voter brings the ballot to be scanned. The result is that the ink accumulates inside the reader until it causes errors. The solution is to use the fast drying Sharpie markers instead. Thus I wouldn't be too quick to remove the Sharpie marks from the approved marking pen list. Guy 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.

- References:
  - RE: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
    - From: "Sophia Lee" <sophia@dieboldes.com>
  - Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
    - From: "Ian Piper" <ian@dieboldes.com>
  - Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
    - From: Guy Lancaster <glanca@dieboldes.com>

- Prev by Date: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
- Next by Date: Re: Red Ovals
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread