Ian's
SoapBox
Circumstances like these
(see Nel's e-mail below) are the primary reason why Global Election Systems,
Inc. has to have a printer certification program that certifies actual
people in a print shop. This kind of garbage has got to stop.
There are ignorant people out there printing ballots for our machines
claiming that someone in Global says it is alright to do it this way or
that. This ballot proofing is a waste of Global's time (because we
never charge for it). And when we find out about misprinted ballots
after it is too late to reprint, Global usually takes some of the blame, or
has to bend over backwards and compromise the system to make it work (again,
we never charge for it).
My proposal has always
been:
Train individual(s) from print
shops, at the Global McKinney Training Center, for a fee which needs to
be determined. Those individual(s) must oversee the production of all
ballots and proof the ballots. If the individual(s) discontinue
employment with that print shop, then that print shop must have other
individual(s) trained (for additional fees) to take the previous
individual(s) place, otherwise the print shop becomes de-certified by Global
and is advertised to our customers as such. No grandfathering
allowed. Current print shops would have to take the course along side
new print shops in order to be certified by Global. Currently no print
shops are certified by Global, only recommended. That means they can
still make mistakes if they haven't been properly trained.
Print shops should sign an
agreement and pay an annual fee for the privilege of printing ballots for
Global customers. In return for that payment and meeting our
certification requirements, Global should aggressively advertise these print
shops to our customers, on our website, with mailed hardcopy, and other
means, to promote ballot printing business towards certified and paying
print shops. If they screw up enough times (once is enough for me),
then they could be de-certified, or have to go through the re-certification
process again, but definitely be held accountable for the cost of
reprinting. Ignorance is no excuse.
Whenever discussing ballot issues
with customers (who have the where-with-all to call first and print second),
I keep getting asked "when is Global going to adopt a certification
program for print shops?".
It's long overdue. I can
help get it started by training individuals in Support (Training) and by
helping to develop the program criteria, but Support (Training)
would have to take it from there. As well, all of our own support
people should take the course to get the big picture on ballot
printing.
In regards to Nel's
E-mail:
Coloured
ballots
I will examine the
ballots sent to me to see if they match to our specified Pantone
background colors.
Precinct
numbers
I will also examine the
non-standard printing above the diagnostic marks to see if the ballots will
calibrate correctly when fed head first.
Ballot
verification
Own Dunn may be able to print the
transparencies but do the tranparencies meet with our template
specifications? When will these people learn? We sell approved
transparencies out of Global McKinney because they each have been inspected
to meet with our stricter tolerance for template tranparencies (ballot
tolerances do not apply to templates).
Red
ovals
The magenta ovals will be picked
by some AccuVotes depending on a wide variety of conditions too numerous to
list here. Pure Magenta is not red. It is actually seen by our
visible light readers as marks. Only Pantone Red 032U and Pantone
Orange 130U is "invisible" and should be used for oval line
printing.
If you read all of this, I thank
you for your time. Please direct your comments to the higher
authorities in Global.
Ian
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000
10:29 PM
Subject: Owen Dunn Printers
The
following is a synopsis of a conversation I had today with Lee
Green at Owen Dunn Printers in Fayettville, NC, who prints ballots
for
·
Flagler County,
FL
·
Alachua County,
FL
·
Hernando County,
FL
·
Lowndes County,
GA
·
Oconee County,
GA
·
Walton County,
FL
Coloured
ballots
Owen Dunn is printing coloured ballots for some or
all of these counties as follows: first ballot stock is printed
with the appropriate colour in its entirety, then the colour-printed
stock is printed with the ballot artwork. Due to the technology he
is using, it is apparently easier to place colour on a ballot in this
manner, rather than by printing limited colour in a title bar area and
print ballot artwork in a two-colour run. As colour occurs on the
entire ballot face and thus the control mark and voting oval areas, it
has been necessary to restrict colours to a very pale blue (Republican)
and very bright green (Non-Partisan) as stipulated in our Ballot
Specifications Guide.
Beverly Hill of Alachua County is unhappy with this
colour arrangement because a) she didn't like the colour and b) she only
wanted the colour to appear in the (unrestricted) title area of the
ballot. I am not sure what the sentiments of other counties are with
respect to colour usage. Before the main primary election,
however, Owen Dunn will upgrade their printing equipment to be able to
print at least two-coloured ballots in single runs.
Due to the
fact that using coloured stock is so uncommon, I asked Lee to send
myself and Ian Piper sample ballots to test even though in theory we
support the pantone background colours. Ian will perform tests
using a colour densometer and I will perform volume tests (1000's) over
several AccuVotes in order to ensure that no stray or unusual marks are
detected. Owen Dunn had only performed unvoted and fully voted
ballot tests with these ballots, which is insufficient.
Ballot
verification
I have
recommended to Lee to use transparencies to check ballots, which come in
11”, 14” and 18” flavors, which will allow him to
precisely determine the correctness of control mark, cut mark and voting
oval positioning, which are critical components of ballot artwork.
Lee can apparently generate these transparencies
himself.
Red
ovals
Currently
the red oval ballots required by Flagler and Citrus Counties are printed
with magenta, which should in fact be 032 red (according to our
specifications).
Precinct numbers
Custom precinct numbers are being printed on ballots
on stubs as well as on the ballot above the Diagnostic marks (this was
confirmed by faxes of ballots sent to me of Alachua and Hernando
Counties). Apparently, our company recommended this as acceptable
to Lee. Printing above the Diagnostic marks is a problem for two
reasons:
-
the white level of the affected channels will
be distorted to the point where underlying marked voting ovals may
not be detected
-
the proximity of the precinct number to the
Diagnostic marks may interfere with the AccuVotes' ability to
calibrate ballots
I told Lee to ensure that:
-
precinct IDs were kept away from the Diagnostic
marks as well as columns containing voting ovals
-
ensure that in future precinct IDs are only
printed inside the control mark area, in an unrestricted text zone
on the ballot
If this was to be a problem (which I am sure it will
not be), ballots would have to be fed foot first in order to not distort
white levels.
Nel
Finberg