10872
Comments (4284)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
19
ironside 19 points ago +19 / -0

This is how the bulk of votes were switched.

Through creatively tweaking the oval coverage threshold settings it should be possible to set thresholds in such a way that a non-trivial amount of ballots are marked "problem ballots" and sent to the "NotCastImages" folder.

It is possible for an administrator of the ImageCast Central work station to view all images of scanned ballots which were deemed "problem ballots" by simply navigating via the standard "Windows File Explorer" to the folder named "NotCastImages" which holds ballot scans of "problem ballots".

It is possible for an administrator of the "ImageCast Central" workstation to view and delete any individual ballot scans from the "NotCastImages" folder by simply using the standard Windows delete and recycle bin functions provided by the Windows 10 Pro operating system.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
45best45 4 points ago +4 / -0

Considering the sheer number of ballots, it seems like a lot of work to manually go through thousands of images in windows explorer and isolate the Trump ones. It was either automated, there is more to this, or there were hundreds of people all doing this in unison.

1
sgttoporbottoms 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe they are separated into stacks by which they vote. Don’t quote me on that

1
SryServiceDown 1 point ago +2 / -1

Do we know of any country that could staff hundreds of people to do menial tasks like this?

Perhaps Captain: Sum Timg Wong could help.

2
Marybearcakes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Look how automated it has become on Facebook and Twitter. Everything is censored. Isn’t that part of AI technology?

3
NegansTiger 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is the part that I don’t understand. If they did a hand count would they have found those? I mean they wouldn’t know which ballots fell into that category but I would think the numbers would have been changed. I have tried to get answers on that but haven’t heard anything concrete yet.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
ironside 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think this is why the counting is so slow in the trouble states. If the settings were kept at the same tolerance, the votes thrown in the folder could be deleted again in the recount.