tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3192072547625043871.post6463546091779996644..comments2023-08-19T20:04:11.819+08:00Comments on In Gratitude and In Service: Recount ReduxIn Gratitudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14034730363932879713noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3192072547625043871.post-68019496802133433912011-03-19T16:01:46.981+08:002011-03-19T16:01:46.981+08:00Hi Telibert,
This is going to be short and quick...Hi Telibert, <br /><br />This is going to be short and quick.<br /><br />The recount or revision in an election protest will only involve votes for the contested position. Thus, the error rate (as found by Cenpeg and Namfrel in its monitoring of the RMA) would be relevant only of it will be material to the election results concerning the particular contest. As to the human appreciation of the degrees of shading of ovals, I don't see enough of let's say 49.9999 or 50.00001 shading being disputed in an election protest so much so that it would put person doing a "visual appreciation" on a collision course with the PCOS "appreciation." I don't know, but I think the issue of the degree of shading as a source of conflict is a bit exaggerated, as the ovals are quite small to produce a significant number of difficult to judge situations. <br /><br />In any case, I agree that the accuracy and reliability of the PCOS is suspect, but primarily because of the failure of comelec to install the security features which the law or even its own resolution requires. This is precisely the reason why there should be a sound election dispute resolution mechanism, that will address all possible questions as to the accuracy and reliability of the system used, as these questions impact on actual election results. EDR should be able, as much as it can, to correct inaccuracies, due to fraud or error, and lead to the proclamation of the rightful winner. On the other hand it should also afford an opportunity for COMELEC to have its PCOS count affirmed as accurate. <br /><br />The ambivalence of comelec as to whether to allow a manual or visual recount or revision of ballots or to limit recount to the use of PCOS adds to the suspicion. Comelec should be confident in showing that even a manual or visual count can affirm the accuracy of their PCOS count, if they think their choice of system is right. <br /><br />The bottom line issue in most of the current protest cases is whether the PCOS machines counted correctly and whether the CCS or the vote transmission and aggregation process were accurate. Human eyes can be counted on to recount the votes, if only to ensure credible election results in the light of a suspicious PCOS system. The adjudicators just need to make sure that the ballots they would be reading are in the same state as when they were cast on election day. The so called "post election operation" prevalent in previous manual elections is still possible.<br /><br />hey too much ramblings from me now.... mag usap na lang tayo idol! <br /><br />LUieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com