Ah, so no audit?

Um better than a audit

I have worked on 2 satellite related projects in my career - building software systems in support of them - so I have a fairly comprehensive understanding of what is involved. The amount of complexity and the giant footprints that would be left from using satellites to hack into networks makes it practically absurd. Even if the Vatican satellites had coverage in Germany, there would have to be equipment on the ground to connect them to the network where the servers were. Otherwise, they would connect to the Internet to connect to the servers, which in that case, why would they need satellites??? It makes no sense.

Again an audit is just a small sample @rip.lul

in-person voting, with voter id, and without any adjudication would prevent most of the allegations

Trying to figure out how that answers my question. <:einstein:618543618529034262>

Well first off it doesn’t seem like you know what a audit is. @rip.lul

How so?

I'd love to see a revote just to see if the outcome changes 🍿

Secondly they took the machines out of the equation and didn’t two full hand recounts. Looked at every ballot again twice and counted them with observers present @rip.lul

but also want to move past all this craziness

if Maw bans someone, I am gonna name the event Mawgate

Um... but wifi

@james j how does it seem like I don’t know what an audit is?

lol

https://twitter.com/PunchbowlNews/status/1347604167355936772?s=20

And someone tested positive

Because an audit is only dealing with a small sample of ballots @rip.lul

Adjudication is done by Vote Review Panels in every jurisdiction. People who consider this a point of fraud don't understand the process.

Still trying to figure out how it ‘seems’ like I don’t know what an audit is. But k

yeah I just mean it doesn't come into play with in-person 'console' voting

Because you don’t @rip.lul

That’s presumptuous.

Not really. Either you are asking for signature matching post removing the envelope which is impossible. Or you are talking about the machines which is equally ridiculous @rip.lul

All you know is that he is acting very much like he doesn't know.

That’s true

When you audit ‘small sample size of X’ if their are irregularities it leads to a further audit.

In any set of data.

Risk Limiting Audits are done on a subset of the total vote. This subset is determined by the amount of ballots cast and the margin of victory. In GA, with 5m ballots cast and a margin of victory of less than 15k, the Risk Limiting Audit would have entailed 1.5m randomly selected ballots. It was determined that the overhead to do it that way was more than just doing a complete recount. That is how they ended up doing a complete recount under the auspices of a RLA. @rip.lul

I just asked if they did an audit and you said I don’t know what an audit it. @james j simple question, not a simple answer.

Again they looked at every ballot twice in full @rip.lul

Simple question not simple answer.

A full hand count is better than a audit

If you knew this you would not keep talking about audits

I wasn’t talking about it. I asked if they did an audit. And you got rude. Thanks for the feedback.

I think the Dems pulled some shady stuff here bending rules (and trying to bend rules), but there was no dominion vote switching, ballot dumps or any stuff like that. The reasoning for that is simple: If you were going to rig an election - would you do it in the most obvious, easily disproved way?

How do you not know they did two full hand recounts @rip.lul

Social media are taking the kind of actions id expect if 230 was pulled.

Deplatform and go insane reinforcing their term and conditions to further align with their ideological preference, so that when they do ban someone for something which seems incredibly partisan ..... they [social media] can simply point to ..

@james j how do you know I don’t know?

Simple question - not simple answer

Big tech gone crazy.