Replies

I’ve been doing Software development for most of my career and what I’m reading is totally unacceptable. I can understand why the state of Texas, after thoroughly evaluating Dominion’s Voting System, rejected using it.

I have been programming for 35 years, from minicomputers to mainframes to modern internet backend servers, from HPUX to MVS to Linux to Windows, from COBOL to C to JavaScript and many technolgies in between. My primary clients are in the insurance and banking industries, and have experienced auditing mostly in regard to banking, which is one reason why I find the ASOG audit to be highly suspect, sloppy and amateurish. It is chock full of unsupported allegations, which one would never find in a professional audit.

RE: the problem was human error in failing to update the reporting server with the proper election reporting software.
Here’s a question - Why were the machines NOT UPDATED WITH THE RIGHT SOFTWARE LONG BEFORE THE ELECTION?
Do these people know how to do mission critical software?
You MUST do quality assurance testing of the software long before you release it for production. You do not update software when the election is ongoing or DURING PRODUCTION. So, what’s this nonsense about failing to update the software? IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UPDATED LONG BEFORE November 3 and should SAY THERE till the counting is over !! ANY software that needs to be updated in the middle of its operation is sloppy and suspect.

Most of the news reports do indeed say "software" wasn't updated, however that's not exactly what the clerk testified about the error. If you are indeed a software developer, then you should know there really are two components, software and data. An update that adds or removes issues/candidates to the ballot of particular precints is clearly data entered by a clerk, and not a software update. Also the ballot update certainly did occur well before the election, the date of which was not specified.

And here’s my other point - I know you have been trying to tell everyone in this thread to be skeptical about this forensic auditing company called Allied Security Operations.

ASOG was involved in the case Guiliani brought and cited Minnesota election data instead of Michigan data. Unprofessional and sloppy. Human error? ASOG in this case cited perticular Michigan precints with turnout data that exceeded 100% which was easily debunked. Unprofessional and sloppy. Human error? Deliberate? State, company officials dispute report claiming Antrim County tabulators bungled results

Fair enough, if this is so, what’s the problem with confronting them in court and showing them what is wrong with their analysis?

What's the problem with anyone here waiting for it? You already have a pretty good preview of some of what they are going to say from the above article.

RE: I find the ASOG audit to be highly suspect, sloppy and amateurish. It is chock full of unsupported allegations, which one would never find in a professional audit.

Well, since we are both in the same field ( I am doing Java, C#, C++, Powershell, Message Queueing and DevOps for various industries myself), Explain to me why the need to update the reporting software in the middle of an election (you said so above). Shouldn't the software be running in place already? I find it curious that you aren't concerned about the sloppy design of the software that will require the need for this.

RE: If you are indeed a software developer, then you should know there really are two components, software and data. An update that adds or removes issues/candidates to the ballot of particular precints is clearly data entered by a clerk, and not a software update. Also the ballot update certainly did occur well before the election, the date of which was not specified.

I was not the one who wrote this, you did:

the sworn testimony of the Antrim County clerk (Republican) Sheryl Guy that the problem was human error in failing to update the reporting server with the proper election reporting software.

What the heck is this need to update a reporting software? That software should be in place, tested and ready for use, NOT UPDATED IN AN ELECTION.

And here's the other question - updating of ballots of particular precincts. This feature is not only error prone but also fraud prone don't you tbink?

RE: State, company officials dispute report claiming Antrim County tabulators bungled results

Well, that's my point - if you want to dispute the ASOG claim and want to point out that they are wrong, sloppy or lying, why resist an open confrontation in a court of law? Why do we see such resistance not only in Michigan but also in Maricopa County in Arizona where even a legislative subpoena is being disobeyed? Shouldn't all these jurisdictions WELCOME the challenge in order to refute the claims of deliberate fraud once and for all?

All the criticisms that you leveled in your posts can be brought out in the open for all to see. So, tell me, why the resistance?

What's the problem with anyone here waiting for it? You already have a pretty good preview of some of what they are going to say from the above article.

My problem is one word -- TIME. As long as they do not wait till Biden is declared the rightful and fair winner of this election, I don't mind waiting. As it stands now, I can't help but see this as an attempt to run out the clock.