thats not a rushed format its how official hearings are supposed to go it was the only official one so far

because trusted systems require standards and per the questions I have asked you guys have answered there are no standards for the poll work force.

Michigan had an official hearing before their committee for oversight in the senate as a function of state congress. The other two states had Guiliani line up his witnesses and got Trump sycophants from the state senate and house and gave them the floor to do and say whatever on TV and then had the far right folks say yeah Im going to introduce legislation and fix this thing

what additional standards should they pass?

Yeah it was rushed, because of the number of people to get through. Still worthwhile to listen through.

its not rushed its just a hearing 😄 they make every witness tell their most relevant few minutes if they arent an expert because none of them have more to say

That's a very important part the affidavits played in fixing this process.

Oan was curbed for a week, are they just using trumps YouTube account

All this tells you is that NEP did not provide any updated totals for that time - one can only speculate as to why the data stopped for that period of time. There can be any number of reasons why the data appears to stop as that point

how is the process fixed and how did it help? do you know what the green button does? or why the machine has three trays? or if its suspicious when people push the button or put papers in those trays?

Nobody else there knew or found out. Giuliani and the congressfolks didn't get basic information first. They were never interested in proving actual wrongful things. They just wanted to create more confusion.

if you take your child to day care of you expect the workers not to be criminals. there are standards in place to ensure this is the case.

but it's okay for God knows who to work in the polls.

No. There are multiple uploads BY THE SAME PRECINCTS. They're distinct, and sequential

like I said there is interviews and no criminals

So what ? The uploading isn’t tied to physical counting @DrSammyD

Uploading multiple times IS tied to physical counting.

No @DrSammyD that is not tied to physical counting

its basically a light temporary factory job you have the same process to get in and training and long shifts. they dont want criminals and drug users counting ballots often they cant even cast a ballot

Whatever man. I'm done talking with brainlets

The uploads are from NEP who collects the data from the precincts by any number of ways. Does the feed provide the source file, method and timestamp of when it was collected by NEP? Or does it have the time that it was sent via the NEP->NYT feed?

what do all the people in here do that don't chat are they like creepy chat watchers

Uploading data and data entry are separate from physical counting @DrSammyD

Well the affidavits are a great way to start to open up the pandoras box. One cant gloss over the details and say it doesn't matter or these occurrences of irregularities did not happen. The testimonies and questioning provided a greater understanding and learnings.

Do they have training to perform their jobs?

You can absolutely gloss over the details TW that's like saying you can use the internet without 4chan

I think it's like 2 weeks or a month of training busillis you can't come in last minute

@TW20 it’s about can they actually prove what they are saying is accurate, is it provable, like I have said before in other posts . I can say anything. It means nothing if I don’t have a way to prove it

https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/precincts/GAGeneral-2020-10-31T22:14:05.096Z.json

And like mentioned, an affidavit is proof / evidence.

Not if it is a unprovable statement @TW20

How you collect the affidavit and how you back it up with facts lends to the credibility

If I signed a affidavit of seeing big foot, it doesn’t mean anything unless I can prove it. It’s does not get you closer to being able to say Bigfoot exists

Also I can’t get in trouble because there is no way to falsify the affidavit

Kayleigh MacAcrazy and Jenna Guiliani held up a stack of "200 affidavits of fraud" and they were introduced into court. The judge said how did you collect these. They said we went on an internet forum and made people click a button that says I'm not a robot and the write anything. If they could not specifically disprove what was said they added it to the stack. The judge said that's not how you collect evidence and threw them away.

Then counties and states should not be rediscent to release the voting machines for investigation, so we can physically look at the evidence.

But if there was a huge cash crop I could make off the big foot community by saying big foot existed, if doing so got me money or a tv deal. I might just send in a un falsifiable affidavit @TW20

The were collecting internet comments 😂

Internet forums aren't legitimate?

@TW20 the affidavits don’t point to anything referring to the physicality of the machine. Which affidavit presented in the hotel conference could be verified with looking at the machines? According to them the machines were designed to be untraceable

Well the Powell people

It's not very reliable like "I saw poll workers writing Joe Biden on every ballot" well we cant say you didnt say that and we have nothing to back it up. "Well I saw ballots from Mars" you're in. "I saw Mickey mouse on a ballot" score

Well the machines are hackable. Not secure in the least. A windows cut and paste operation.