🚀 go-pugleaf

What,exactly, does this have to do with DC dining?

D Flint wrote:

> What do you think about this and have you seen this popular site before?
> 
> This was taken from a web site
> http://www.afvr.org
> 
> How can we safeguard the integrity of each vote?
> Today we have technology that protects our financial systems, military
> weapon systems and national intelligent organizations. These proven systems
> can be combined in a way to issue serialized equipment to authorize
> personnel for the dates and hours needed. Each would have their own level of
> clearance to perform the tasks they are responsible for. Each action would
> be recorded and verified with a higher levels of network authority and
> again, only available during the hours and dates needed. Ballots would only
> be printed after the voter has cast their vote but before they leave the
> booth. If the voter made a mistake he could put the printed ballot into the
> booth's scanner for correction. All ballots scanned at the booth would go
> into a shredder and the voter could then correct his ballot on the screen
> and reprint his ballots. Once the voter accepts the printed ballot he
> submits his vote on the screen and takes the two ballots to the depository.
> So two computer generated, serialized and scanner perfect receipts of the
> completed ballot are printed.* One for the voter and one for the public
> record. This would eliminate all the extra ballots that could be used for
> unauthorized voting as well as any question of voter intent.  Each piece of
> equipment involved in the issuing of the receipt would be linked to the
> serial# of that ballot and an electronic document would be generated that
> exactly matched the two printed receipts. So the voter themselves has
> validate the printed ballots, keeping one for themselves, while the other
> electronic time-stamped document is deposited into an optical scanner used
> as a secure depository. This second scanned count which should always match
> the electronic count. This paper ballot could also be used for recounts if
> needed. The voter could use the receipt to inquire about their vote in the
> future. The stuffing of the ballot box or "finding ballots" would be
> eliminated.  With this system, if you find a ballot, you have to find the
> voter that cast that ballot too. This is not so in any of the current
> systems in place today nor have we ever heard such a system ever proposed.
>   http://www.afvr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>