elprincipe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 60 (100%)
Here:
http://senaterecount.startribune.com/
You can judge up to 599 actual ballots currently. I know that's a lot, but I've been doing a few minutes at a time and am up to 250 judged (Coleman 101, Franken 89, Other/no vote 60). It's interesting to see 90+% of the challenges to ballots are obviously frivolous as those are clearly marked (or not marked).
EDIT: did some more, up to 500. Coleman 198, Franken 185, Other/no vote 117.
EDIT2: Okay, finished. Four ballots won't come up with any pictures for me so I can't judge them. Dunno if that's a Firefox issue or what. Anyway, I got for 595 ballots: Coleman 238, Franken 217, Other/no vote 140. I guess I was more inclined to disqualify ballots than people on average. I don't see how you can say when there are two ovals filled in, one with an X through it and one without, what they meant by the X (did they mean they were voting for that one or not? other ballots had X's through them as votes).
http://senaterecount.startribune.com/
You can judge up to 599 actual ballots currently. I know that's a lot, but I've been doing a few minutes at a time and am up to 250 judged (Coleman 101, Franken 89, Other/no vote 60). It's interesting to see 90+% of the challenges to ballots are obviously frivolous as those are clearly marked (or not marked).
EDIT: did some more, up to 500. Coleman 198, Franken 185, Other/no vote 117.
EDIT2: Okay, finished. Four ballots won't come up with any pictures for me so I can't judge them. Dunno if that's a Firefox issue or what. Anyway, I got for 595 ballots: Coleman 238, Franken 217, Other/no vote 140. I guess I was more inclined to disqualify ballots than people on average. I don't see how you can say when there are two ovals filled in, one with an X through it and one without, what they meant by the X (did they mean they were voting for that one or not? other ballots had X's through them as votes).
Last edited by a moderator: