I don't believe I contradicted Anderson. There was some other data provided regarding server images on Wednesday. Here is what the article said:
"When Alderson received Lindell’s data on Wednesday morning, he said it didn’t add up.
“We were unable to get the data from the actual 2020 election. Very disappointing,” said Alderson.
Some of his colleagues were discovering the same thing.
“But every person who came specifically looking for those p-caps was very disappointed. Some were somewhat angry,” said Alderson.
Again, Lindell offered a reward if someone could prove that his data didn't come from the 2020 election. No one present has offered proof that it didn't. "I can't decrypt it", or "I never saw the data" proves nothing.
I would suggest that no reward was going to be collected if the packet captures were not available or were so limited in quantity that a judgement could not be rendered by cyber experts who attended the Symposium.
On the Internet, everyone is an expert on everything. Again, if you weren't at the event, legally, all you offer is so much hearsay. Even if you were to be qualified as an expert on interpreting P-caps, since you never saw the data, you can't analyze the data. You just repeat so much hearsay and speculation, and as noted above, contradict your alleged sources.
Agreed! FR is full of lawyers, doctors, and everything in between as an example! ;)
More likely, Lindell only offered a very small sample for analysis, which was too little for those present to decrypt or conclusively analyze. That doesn't disprove his theory.
Not sure what the purpose of his $5 million dollar challenge was then. And again, unfortunately, all we are left with is a theory that is yet unproven.
Expert analysis from strangers wasn't his purpose in calling the forum. It was simply a method of drumming up interest for the event like a carnival barker. Ultimately, the matter should get decided by SCOTUS, not guys commenting on the Internet. Lindell did state that he had 12 different experts from across the U.S. confirm the data, including two government employees. When the court action is filed, that's the main event, not what happened this week.
Oh, the court action that people are talking about. We shall see.
Since Lindell has no standing to bring a petition for a writ of quo warranto, he would not be the one to use them in court. He's just the PR man working for more audits to produce conclusive evidence of the hack, i.e., the ballots themselves. You've missed the big picture here.
I don't think he has done his claims any favors with the problems encountered with the Symposium including data captures not being provided. I'm not sure I missed the big picture. But perhaps.
Again I’m sorry Lindell did not make his pcaps available for expert or public review. I believe his heart is in the right place, and that he was poorly served by his staff and those who did his pcap research. It's unfortunate he apparently is unable or unwilling to make some more all of the data public for the claims he has made. No one should get a pass on proving their claims on such an important issue. Including Lindell. I don't think he yet has proved his claims. But we shall see.