Precisely. There are two possibilities; either 0.185 of a person voted, or they used an algorithm to switch votes.
The sworn affidavit that this comes from is worth reading, as it also raises a number of other statistical impossibilities: https://i.imgur.com/dbHHV9M.jpeg
I keep hearing a lot about there is a limit on decimal precision.
I am just a simple person not a math genius, but why in the hell are votes ever counted fractionally. They are always whole numbers. There isn't a situation where someone says I want to vote 45% for Biden, 45% for Trump and 10% for Jorhansan.
The question I have here is, what is the raw data being reported?
If it reports total votes as well as percent, and TV and BV are derived fields, of course they have decimals in them (take TV/0.534 and BV/0.448, equals 3606490). Now, there's no reason to DO it this way, except to be able to play shenanigans, but 'machine is capable of shenanigans' doesn't prove they are actively doing them.
If the machine is directly reporting TV and BV, that's pretty solid.
So the strength of this depends entirely on which of these fields is raw data.
I'm not convinced. Isn't this just an artefact of the 0.001% precision limit? From what I gathered, in the actual precinct log it showed whole votes and the fraction is rounded if fraction magic is used. The precinct data shows whole votes and the statewide count has a limit of 0.001% precision and its rounded to it so it appears to show fractional votes, but it's actually reporting on whole votes (which most likely were fractional votes that were rounded at precinct level). Fraction magic was used at precinct level in a complete static vote count change and not just a weighting. Read my comment here: https://thedonald.win/p/11QS33aMD6/x/c/4DpL5khd0JV
I don't know why I've been downvoted because I'm right, this is a moot point and doesn't show the real fraud that took place. The precision is limited to 0.001%,which gives rise to illusory fractions, like I said, this isn't where the fractions are. The fractions are at the precinct level, which are rounded to whole numbers.
This is the best argument one I’ve seen. There is no getting around or explaining why both candidates got increases in the same fractional equation
Precisely. There are two possibilities; either 0.185 of a person voted, or they used an algorithm to switch votes.
The sworn affidavit that this comes from is worth reading, as it also raises a number of other statistical impossibilities:
https://i.imgur.com/dbHHV9M.jpeg
There’s no “dominion real time data feed” unless he had access to something that has not been disclosed publicly.
Ok thank you
There’s a NY Times/Edison research real time data feed but that is not really an official source. And it covers all precincts, not dominion-only
It’s the new partial voting for wishy washy voters. I can give 73% of my vote to one, and 27% to the other.
What’s this from?
A sworn affidavit from cybersecurity expert, Russell James Ramsland, Jr.
It's worth reading the full affidavit. He covers a number of statistical impossibilities and improbabilities, including:
So it has been confirmed dat NYT/Edison stream comes directly from Dominion?
I keep hearing a lot about there is a limit on decimal precision.
I am just a simple person not a math genius, but why in the hell are votes ever counted fractionally. They are always whole numbers. There isn't a situation where someone says I want to vote 45% for Biden, 45% for Trump and 10% for Jorhansan.
If 160,000,000 people were given 1 dollar bill in which to put into the ballot box of their choice, pennies would not magically appear.
The question I have here is, what is the raw data being reported?
If it reports total votes as well as percent, and TV and BV are derived fields, of course they have decimals in them (take TV/0.534 and BV/0.448, equals 3606490). Now, there's no reason to DO it this way, except to be able to play shenanigans, but 'machine is capable of shenanigans' doesn't prove they are actively doing them.
If the machine is directly reporting TV and BV, that's pretty solid.
So the strength of this depends entirely on which of these fields is raw data.
I'm not convinced. Isn't this just an artefact of the 0.001% precision limit? From what I gathered, in the actual precinct log it showed whole votes and the fraction is rounded if fraction magic is used. The precinct data shows whole votes and the statewide count has a limit of 0.001% precision and its rounded to it so it appears to show fractional votes, but it's actually reporting on whole votes (which most likely were fractional votes that were rounded at precinct level). Fraction magic was used at precinct level in a complete static vote count change and not just a weighting. Read my comment here: https://thedonald.win/p/11QS33aMD6/x/c/4DpL5khd0JV
no
Care to elaborate
You don’t count in decimals.
I don't know why I've been downvoted because I'm right, this is a moot point and doesn't show the real fraud that took place. The precision is limited to 0.001%,which gives rise to illusory fractions, like I said, this isn't where the fractions are. The fractions are at the precinct level, which are rounded to whole numbers.
no
seems legit... if you're trying to cheat
FUCK "FRACTION MAGIC".
ONE PERSON. ONE VOTE.