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

# Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.

- To: "Request Change Report" <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
- From: "Ian Piper" <ian@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 10:37:22 -0600
- References: <001701bf35c6$2ef83b40$d95f0b9a@greg>

Again I state: Bleed through is always a possibility even if the voter doesn't use a Sharpie. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Forsythe To: Request Change Report Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 9:19 AM Subject: Fw: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots. ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Forsythe To: Ian Piper Sent: November 23, 1999 10:18 AM Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots. I disagree with Sophia. (brave or foolish?) This potential restriction would make it very difficult to build public opinion poll, census and survey ballots where 16 channels across are used. Canadian elections use Sanford Expresso Bold pens where ever possible. Although this pen has no carbon in the ink, (required for infrared Accu-Votes) Canada does not have any infrared Accu-Votes in the field. The Expresso is a water based pen as opposed to the Sharpie alcohol based pen, therefore does not soak through, does not dry out, (to produce poor marks) has a strong fiber tip, and produces a filled oval with minimal effort. Available at office outlet stores, etc. I would like to see this particular pen included in the approved marking instrument section of our specifications for visible light only. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ian Piper To: Request For Change Sent: November 23, 1999 8:41 AM Subject: Re: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots. 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 ----- From: Sophia Lee To: Tyler ; Request For Change 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.

- References:
  - Fw: Ovals positioned back to back on ballots.
    - From: "Greg Forsythe" <gfglobal@earthlink.net>

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