Diebold's Problems Worse Than Reported, Tests Find.

[nicknameless]

(Reposted. Put in wrong place before.)

From VerifiedVotingFoundation.org
http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?id=6257

System Crashes, Paper Jams Prove Widespread in California Counties
by Ian Hoffman, Daily Review
August 3rd, 2005

<snip>

Software problems occurred in those earlier tests, but state voting-systems analysts were more focused in the mock election on paper jams. Yet when Diebold representatives trucked in 96 new TSx machines and local elections officials voted on them July 20 in a San Joaquin County warehouse, nearly twice as many machines froze or crashed as had paper jams.

Last week, McPherson rejected use of the TSx, saying the machine's lack of reliability "isn't good enough for voters in California, and it isn't good enough for me."

On the strength of paper jams alone, two-dozen critics of electronic voting rallied in front of the Alameda County administrative offices Tuesday and demanded that county supervisors withdraw from negotiations to buy the machines. Homemade signs accused the McKinney, Texas-based maker of voting machines, of "stealing" elections and called on Alameda County to "dump Diebold."

<snip>

Nineteen machines had 21 screen freezes or system crashes, producing a blue screen and messages about an "illegal operation" or a "fatal exception error." A Diebold technician had to restart the machine for voting to resume. Ten machines had a total of 11 printer jams. Almost one-third of all machines in the mock election had a problem.

<snip>

More at link.

[Ellipsis]

1. The deadline for HAVA need be EXTENDED!

[slor]

2. Thanks for posting n/t