you want hand counts, but then you say hand-counted validations can't be done in six days?
Sounds like you're unfamiliar with how precinct-based hand-counting works. The ballots are all counted at each precinct, publicly, with results posted before ballots move anywhere.
The type of post-electon hand auditing you seem to refer to takes place centrally, with ALL ballots in the same place. Obviously, unless you have a LOT of counting teams, that can take a long time.
Does that help clarify?
This can't mean nobody can have election returns for weeks if we return to a hand-counted system? Can it?
"Can't mean nobody"? Triple negatives aside, hopefully you're now clear on how public, precinct-based hand-counting works and are less confused than you were when you wrote your comment.
Maybe since computers are so inefficient and error prone we should go back to hand-written ledgers and checkout receipts. And never, ever use an ATM.
Perhaps I missed it in my article where I complained about computers being "inefficient"? Seems like you made that part up.
But as to them being error-prone, I'm sure you recognize that when computer tabulators name the loser of an election as the "winner", that's kind of a problem.
What you don't seem to understand, however, is that transactions on ATMs are nothing like secret ballot votes. ATM transactions are transparent in that you can check the transaction at any time to make sure it was recorded accurately. So can your bank. You can go back and show your receipt as evidence, etc. All days, weeks, months and even years later.
That, of course, is NOTHING like voting, which is why different, publicly transparent processes are required before the chain of custody is lost.
Hope that helps and that you won't be quite so lost from here on out either.
= new reply since forum marked as read