Voting Vendor Lacks Paper Trail

[Edit notes moved to the bottom of this post, Greg]

When Diebold declined to share proprietary software with NC elections officials in 2005, Electronic Systems and Software (ES&S), through Printelect, became the only approved vendor of election equipment in North Carolina. Printelect is a North Carolina company with offices in New Bern and printing operations in Fayetteville. Printelect is the authorized dealer for ES&S in North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia and the only ES&S certified printing vendor in these states. Printelect specializes in printed optical scan ballots which it supplies nationwide as well as providing other election related products.

Printelect is presented on company websites as "Printelect, Inc.," and as the "Owen G. Dunn Company" doing business as "Printelect". The NC Secretary of State's Office has no record of a corporate filing for "Printelect, Inc.," either as a new company, name change or merger. The last Annual Report filed by the Owen G. Dunn Company was for the fiscal year ending 12/31/2004. The company also operates "Dunn's Office Solutions" in New Bern.

Searches of the records of the Registers of Deeds in Cumberland County, Craven County and Wake County do not indicate the filing of any Assumed Name Forms for an entity named Printelect. The only related filing was in 1998 in Cumberland County for the "Owen G. Dunn Company" DBA "Fayetteville Printing and Office Supply Company".

Since 2006 there have been some concerns about the cost of printed optical ballots for ES&S machines due to very specific requirements mandated by ES&S which amount to a 20 cent premium per ballot.

In Wake County, N.C., which uses ES&S optical scan machines, Board of Elections Director Cherie Poucher said a local, non-ES&S certified vendor, Commercial Printing, charges no more than 13 cents per ballot. Printelect charges up to 33 cents per ballot.

Poucher said her elections office felt it was wise to use Printelect for the 2006 primary and general elections because those were the first elections using new state-required voting equipment.

By all accounts Printelect is a responsible and reliable vendor and election observers are relieved that Diebold did not succeed in 2005. At a meeting of the Forsyth Board of Elections in 2006 Joyce McCloy of the NC Coalition for Verified Voters commended the Board for not choosing Diebold voting equipment. At the same meeting Elections Director Rob Mr. Coffman discussed the printing of the ballot:

He stated he got a quote from PrintElect, who was an ES&S recommended vendor, and the ballots would cost 28 cents each. He received a quote from another ES&S certified printer in Michigan and the ballots would be 14 cents each. He explained had talked with the State Board of Elections and they were fine with using the Michigan printer on the condition they get ballots to test and are able to confirm the quality of the ballots.

From Printelect.com and PrintelectStore.com

Printelect, Inc., located in Fayetteville, North Carolina, formerly Owen G. Dunn Company and Fayetteville Printing Company have been in business combined for over 176 years. We have printed optical scan ballots since their introduction in the Southeast in 1976.
:::::
Today, we are the largest printer of optical scan ballots on the east coast, and one of the largest in the United States. In most election years, we will produce over 10 million ballots. We currently furnish most optical scan ballots used in North Carolina, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, South Carolina, Missouri, Alaska, Virginia and New Mexico.
:::::
Originally trained and certified by Election Systems and Software (ES&S), we print ballots for the Optech III-P Eagle and Optech III-P machines. We work together with your ballot programmer in answering any technical questions which may arise concerning your ballots.

I am not a connoisseur of elections, election equipment or procedures. Others are much more knowledgeable (and opinionated) than me on the subject. From what I know optical scan technology is very reliable, ES&S is deemed superior to Diebold in North Carolina and Printelect has been dependable. I have always been troubled by the sole sourcing of equipment, supplies and service. For matters related to the integrity and security of voting I would however expect the credentials of vendors to be impeccable and verifiable. When voter registration criteria, including identity and location, are contentious I don't think it is too much to ask that Printelect formally register where it conducts business.

Q. How long has Printelect been in the elections business?
A. Formerly Owen G. Dunn Company, founded in 1902, in New Bern, North Carolina, Printelect has been in the election industry for over one hundred years. As the largest printer of optical scan ballots and one of the largest printers in the country, we currently furnish millions of ballots throughout the United States annually. As an authorized dealer for Election Systems and Software (ES&S) in North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia, we have extensive experience with optical scan and DRE technology. Printelect has installed and maintained the state-wide voting systems in both North Carolina and South Carolina and we are currently growing transactions throughout Virginia. Our corporate office is located in New Bern, North Carolina and our printing facility (formerly Fayetteville Printing and Office Supply) is located in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

[Edit notes moved to the bottom of this post and retained for the record. I believe the questions raised have been addressed. Greg]

NOTE: NC Voter has links to the Secretary of State filings, which suggest Greg may have missed a document in his research. I'm leaving this up on the front-page until he has a chance to weigh in. Don't you just love the interTubes? The truth will out.

Would the person who has inserted this edit please identify themselves and note my comments below. My information comes from the same document. I have not missed it. Greg

My mistake. A. Sorry for the confusion.

Comments

let us know what SOS says, beating a dead horse

because even the SOS site says this in the FAQ section:

"Because online filing is new you may run into inaccuracies in how records in our database are displayed on the website. If you are sure that you have filed an annual report that the website indicates is outstanding, view your entity’s previously filed documents through your profile. If an annual report indeed exists for that year, ignore the website’s instructions and simply file the report(s) that is actually due."

and when you get done with that, investigate the site you source

next stop, you should use your investigating skills on BBV.org since you found their site worthy of your linking.

Ask them what they did with almost a million bucks in that non interest bearing account?

Did a BOD member borrow it? Did the Treasurer know what happened with the money? It could have earned interest or been spent on real estate even, while it wasnt earning interest for the Corporation.

NCVoter

No amount of brow beating will deter me from speaking as objectively and honestly as I can about things that appear to me to be be worth speaking up about.

I choose to write about things that catch my attention and especially those things that have not caught the attention of anyone else. Since you have brought it to my attention, there appear to be plenty of people on the BVV case, which is not located in NC, my primary focus in this forum.

I understand the implications of some of my statements and how they might challenge what you have fought for thus far. That may make me choose my words more carefully but it does not dissuade me from writing them.

Just curious Greg....

...how did this happen to attract your attention anyway?

How did you happen to look up the name of the state supplier for the sole voting machine/equipment/supply vendor in NC? What got your curiousity up?

Greg is naturally curious

He's not one of those people who likes to sit around and accept the "trust us" mantra that many in government like to spoon feed the electorate.

What, would you have us do sit around and just wait to see if an election gets stolen?

Are we not ever supposed to question anything?

One indication that a company isn't capable of operating as expected is its inability to file appropriate paperwork with the state. With only ONE voting machine/equipment/supplier vendor in the state we have no checks and balances. They have a monopoly. We can't compare how companies x, y and z conduct business. Isn't one of the concerns of these electronic machines that the software can be tampered with? How much confidence will the electorate have in machines/equipment/supplies used in our elections if the company providing it is sloppy in its own paperwork?

As far as I'm concerned, any company operating in this particular industry should be conducting itself in a way that provides not even a hint of impropriety or sloppiness in its business affairs. This will help instill public confidence inthe electoral process.

You might want to wait until something bad happens. Greg wants to keep something bad from happening.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

You obviously don't live outside of this blog, do you?

I don't sit around trusting many people or things I am told. But I have learned not to blurt things out too soon - it's called "telegraphing your moves"

NC was rated as #1 in the nation for accuracy in counting votes by the Brennan Center. Are you alleging that Printelect not being incorporated might result in elections getting stolen?

If you want to keep elections from getting stolen - please to to ncvoter.net and help get HR811 passed so that we get federal election standards as tough as we have them in NC.

We didn't want one company in NC. But our law was a tough one - and many companies objected to it, as well as election directors and county executives. Is it better to have a tough law, or lower the bar to allow for more competition? Our law is tough and it makes us number one in election acuracy. More than one vendor would not mean we have checks and balances - it would mean competition. Our law is tough and we do have checks and balances. That is why the big boys are fighting HR811 tooth and nail - they know there is less profit to be made with a tougher law.

Question things - but ask the right question. The wrong question, or the right question asked the wrong way or the wrong time can do more harm than good.

Good luck getting any business or government agency to opperate with no mistakes at all. That is why we have audit processes in elections. The vendor does nothing but sell equipment and supplies - they don't count the votes. The SBOE checks all the equipment, software, and printed ballots for compliance with the law. So your claim that we shouldn't trust Printelect should also hold true if you visit their headquarters and there is no toilet paper in the bathrooms, or they haven't been cleaned in a while?

How much confidence can I have in anyone who posts about things they know nothing about - and asks the wrong questions or engages in sloppy investigatory techniques?

Hey - from the way things look to me - I could say that this whole thread APPEARS to be an attack on our great law. or even some of the people who supported it in the past or who are trying to get verified voting nationwide. There are people out there who do stuff like that.

And sometimes people on the blogs pass themselves off as something they are not. So I take everything i read on the blogs with a grain of salt.

NCVoter got an award from the NC ACLU for her work for voting integrity. When you get an award from the ACLU, you let me know.

I got nominated to the Wake BOE - one of three people for two slots - by the Wake Democratic party for my work on voting integrity. My NC State House member told a meeting of the Wake Progressives that I probably know more about election integrity and verified voting than he does.

It doesn't mean you can't ask questions - I would hope that you would ask better questions in a public forum, or not jump down the throat of someone who know what they are talking about when they give you better and more correct information.

I ask embarassing questions of people all the time - but I always make sure that I know what the f*ck I am talking about before I ask that question. I wouldn't have asked the question about Printelect's busines status without asking and answering many questions of my own first. And when you raise issues of trust in elections because of sloppy paperwork on the part of a dealer, you open yourself up to a lot of questions.

Do you ever buy Mattel toys for your kids? There is lead paint in some of them. Does buying their toys mean that you are an un-carring parent - even if the toys you buy don't have lead in them? Or you had no way ot knowing?

So when you can do that, you can have the creds to ask me if I want to wait for something bad to happen.

Sometimes little tips drop out of the sky into the hands of people who the tipsters know will blurt it out without thinking - or doing a full investigation. Yes I know people work for a living and can't just get in their car and drive across the state to investigate something in person. But that is one of the biggest complaints I have against the blogs - the standards are too low. Standards for investigative print journalism are much higher. There is a trade off - there aren't enough investigative print journalists out there, and those that are there are employees of big media chains these days. So they don't do enough hard hitting stories anymore. We could hardly get the N&O in Raleigh to even cover verified voting - unless machines blew up or some Diebold employee was caught having sex on a lipe of ballots.

And sometimes tipsters have motives - like trying to raise a phantom issue in the hopes of creating the appearance of something not being right.

You come by your screen name honestly

But if you really want to nail it, consider changing it to "Condescending and Insulting Progressive Pain in the Ass."

You may have significant contributions under your belt, but you have no idea who you're talking to here. None. And to their credit, these folks aren't going to write back with a litany of their accomplishments and community involvement.

I'm grateful to all the work you've done, I sincerely am. But your manner of engagement leaves much to be desired.

Too Wordy A.

How about just "Ass"

Insulting Betsy Muse for not doing enough in the real world is like insulting you for not raising enough money for Democrats.

It's too bad, this guy probably has some redeeming personality traits and qualities in real life, but online he has chosen to leave his manners at the door and to be a jerk.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Greg was correct in probing this,

NC was rated as #1 in the nation for accuracy in counting votes by the Brennan Center. Are you alleging that Printelect not being incorporated might result in elections getting stolen?

and I'll tell you why—any business entity who is awarded a government contract that is twice as high as their competition needs to be scrutinized, to make sure they didn't grease somebody's palms along the way.

Also, a company that's been in business for over a hundred years that decides to assume a new name makes me wonder why. Do they need a few degrees of separation to conceal a conflict of interest?

And sometimes tipsters have motives - like trying to raise a phantom issue in the hopes of creating the appearance of something not being right.

And more often than not, if something doesn't seem right it's because it isn't right.

Tipsters may or may not have motives

Everyone has motives. Your persistence in using ad hominem attacks against people who take even slightly different view points than you makes me quite suspicious of yours.

You obviously don't live outside of this blog, do you?

You have no idea what anyone's life is like unless you know them in person. This is the type of thing I'm talking about - why should anyone give any credence to what you say when you haven't given us sources for the claims you've made, and you've spent a lot of time making personal attacks.

You have a problem with Greg's investigative techniques. We've got that.Not everyone here shares your opinion - imagine that. I suspect that if you put 4 of us in a room together, we'd come out with 5 view points.

I'm challenging you to post a diary about your work, the positive effect it has had (in your opinion), and where you're going from there. Hell, I'll even front page it if it isn't full of personal vendetta.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

NCVoter

You really seem to be trying to deflect attention away from Printelect and to a non-related not-for-profit issue. No matter what the issues this 501(c)(3) has with its financials, it's got nothing to do with the company originally referenced by gregflynn. The issue at hand is this: Does the sole vendor of election products in the state of NC have its financial and legal house in order? I think it's a fair question. In fact, I think it's a very good question, since they are affecting all of us who count ourselves NC voters.

you should use your investigating skills on BBV.org since you found their site worthy of your linking.

You seem to be the one with the ax to grind on BBV.org. Why don't you look into it? Go for it. Make sure you spend a lot of time reading up on the reporting requirements of both the Feds and Washington State before you point fingers.

Ask them what they did with almost a million bucks in that non interest bearing account?

I'm sure you can find out all of that information by contacting the Washington secretary of state's office or state auditor's office, since you are so concerned about it. Or, you know, by contacting blackboxvoting.org. directly. They're not even organized in NC, and have little to do with this discussion, other than the fact that Greg referenced them in his post, and you followed that hare all the way down the rabbit hole.

Did a BOD member borrow it? Did the Treasurer know what happened with the money? It could have earned interest or been spent on real estate even, while it wasnt earning interest for the Corporation.

I sincerely doubt that a BOD member borrowed it. The Treasurer probably did know what happened with the money - the Treasurer generally must sign all kinds of reports. Since Sarbanes-Oxley, there's very little that can go on truly behind closed doors at a not-for-profit.

And again, for the record, the 501(c)(3) of which I am the Executive Director has most of its operating funds in a non-interest bearing account because this is a requirement of many of the donors and grants with whom we work. I don't care what a nameless attorney somewhere said - it's not that unusual in the world of not-for-profit. You must understand that the funds left as assets at the end of a fiscal year are not considered "profit", they are to be reinvested into the corporation, not divided among stockholders as would happen with a for-profit corporation. If you have any other questions about how not-for-profits operate, I refer you to the NC Center for Non-profits. Of course, that's only going to give you requirements for NC, not WA. They could be wildly different.

Now - tell me again what this has to do with Printelect?


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Very nice catch, Greg

The last person you and I found hadn't filed proper forms with the SoS's office was Ted Sampley and we've seen how skanky his business dealings are.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Whew!

I got an email from NC Voter last night and didn't have time to look into it . . . so I simply posted my note at the top of this entry. In reading the entire thread this morning, it's seems to me that Greg's criticism of the company's paperwork filings is perfectly appropriate.

Companies cut corners on stuff like this all the time. Some get caught, most probably don't. But when that company has a giant role in the integrity of our voting system, I suggest the appropriate standard for compliance would be: impeccable. Which is clearly not the case with this corporation.

(I have no idea who NC Voter is . . . I was just doing what I thought was right given the subject matter. But I do know who Greg Flynn is - and I trust him without hesitation. I especially admire his restraint and civility in a discussion where I would certainly have gone ballistic 20 comments ago.)

NC Voter, your words and your tone are more aggressive

than the situation warrants.

As I said before, it seems like you are out-of-proportion angry about all of this. If you are just defending your activism, it doesn't make sense that you are so defensive of this company.

I can admire what the Red Cross does, for example. But when they misappropriate funds, I can go after them with all I've got. It doesn't negate that I want the work that they do to get done.

Greg's post still stands up as far as I can tell. And all along you have been so angry at him, it still seems to me that there's something you're not telling us about all of this.

Or you have a history with Greg?
 
News of the 10th district: See Pat Go Bye Bye,

PrintElect & NC Voter

I just had this topic sent to me and am concerned about the tone and direction it has taken.

Before I comment on this article and the subsequent remarks let me establish my bona fides:

My name is David Allen and I run a publishing company. I am also a computer systems engineer with 20+ experience. I got involved in the e-voting issue when I agree to publish Bev Harris' "Black Box Voting" and to act as her technical consultant (later as a contributor to the book). I was the person who first downloaded Diebold's internal e-mails from an insider at DES, sat in on a secret conference call between BBV vendors and blogged about it an hour after the meeting was over.

After Ms. Harris flipped out and began accusing everyone in sight (myself included) of being secretly in the pay of Diebold/ES&S/Sequoia and other skulduggery, I retired from the issue in disgust. I later rejoined the fight at the urging of Joyce McCloy (of NC Voter) and served on the NC Joint Select Committee on E-Voting, which drafted one of the toughest laws in the nation, a law which Diebold quit the state rather than comply with.

My involvement in this issue can be checked with a phone call to Sen. Ellie Kinnaird or Rep. Verla Insko, or Gary Bartlett at the NC Board of Elections.

That established, I would like to address the questions brought up about PrintElect. In the course of the committee hearings I met with Owen and spoke with him on several occasions. I found him to be a sincere and above board fellow. I have worked with PrintElect in Taylorsville during an election as a tech, so I could observe the operation of ES&S OpScan system "live" rather than as a demo (Disclosure: I was paid a fee for my day's service as a tech, and I donated the fee to the MS Society so to avoid any questions as to my objectivity).

I am aware of no underhanded actions by Owen or his company. And am VERY surprised that when you came up with the questions you state in your posting that you didn't simply call the man up and ask him about it. Even though bloggers are not journalists (I like to think we are better ), I feel we are still compelled to take simple steps such as giving the other side an opportunity to explain themselves before posting accusations of impropriety. A simple phone call probably would have cleared the matter up.

Now, to address some of the remarks toward NC Voter, I would chide her for getting a tad heated in her repsonses, but ask your to forebear since she (and I, to be quite honest) can get a bit techy when we find ourselves being questioned as to our motives.

I have no love for BBV supporters and the companies that peddle their wares, but I don't like to see ANYONE'S integrity impugned without HARD evidence of wrong-doing. PrintElect is not ES&S, it is a rep for ES&S and sells their hardware. Since NC law now only permits VVPB and places considerable oversight on election equipment vendors, I am very confident that NC elections have been on the "up and up".

Am I defending PrintElect and Owen? Why, yes I am. I have seen NO evidence of any unethical behavior and am sure that if you address your concerns to him, he will answer your questions to your satisfaction.

Back to Joyce's (and my) irritation over questions of our own loyalties, you have to understand that it begins to grate on your nerves to have folks who don't know you, question your motives, especially when you have spent a not inconsiderable amount of time and money fighting the good fight on behalf of fair and honest elections.

There are elements to the whole question of e-voting that still needs to be addressed in NC and nationally, but PrintElect isn't one of them. Anyone looking for a villain in dire need of a good blistering need look no further than my own county of Guilford and champion of paperless voting, George Gilbert, who, almost two years later, is still trying to undo the law passed in 2005.

I hope this pours oil on these troubled waters and provides some needed context for the discussion.

David Allen

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Thanks for not pouring gasoline

I appreciate the comments.

I don't think the original post was really questioning motives at all . . . certainly not the motives of you or NC Voter, who none of us actually knows. It was questioning whether a company crossed its t's and dotted its i's . . . which it apparently didn't.

I agree

The original post wasn't questioning my motives or NC Voter's just Owen and PrintElect.

Later down in the comments, things were starting to get heated. No one has questioned my motives here, I simply sought to explain why NC Voter was getting a bit snippy and explained that I have been in her shoes.

That said, it may be possible that PrintElect has neglected to file some form, or that the form has gone missing, or that the records are not up to date. I simply wished to state that it has not been my experience that PrintElect is, to use the British phrase, "bent".

The company in question is not a big souless corp, but an NC-based, family run business. As such, I can sympathize about all the forms that must be filled out and filed to comply with the myriad of laws involved.

The tone of the original post painted a dark picture with questions that could have been answered if the poster had called the company.

Just my two cents...

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

I certainly understand how things get heated

but I still don't understand why the focus suddenly switched from PrintElect to BBV.org. I've gone back and read the entire thread, and I still don't see why that was such a flash point for anyone. Perhaps that can be explained.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

In the original post

there was a link to BBV.org, which is what set off the discussion. The site in question is Bev Harris' and she has serious credibility problems these days.

Ms. Harris is especially criticized for her postings to FreeRepublic trashing other activists and her many outrageous claims. She was banned from DemocraticUnderground.com for making legal threats against posters and the site's admins, and has since curried favor from sites like FR.

Hope that explains the tussle.

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Thanks!

Knowing the background helps me understand the reaction.

The revolution will be blogged!

Damn right it will. :)


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Read my post

Much of your criticism is a response to what others have claimed that I have said or implied.

My only purpose in linking to a document on the BVV site was to allow others to read Printelect's reasonable explanation which was not available anywhere else publicly.

I choose to have this conversation in public. There are so many ironies I don't know where to begin

Others have make their own implications

well asking a question that raises suspiscions and then claiming that Printelect's explanation was reasonable makes about as much sense as Les Merrit asking the State Senate to hold up the Same Day Registration law, then claiming in a public hearing that it's a good law that he has no problems with.

You did make a choice to have this conversation in public. Perhaps knowing that there are people here who have more expertise in the area - you could ask them first next time you get a tip. Or at least question the tipster's motives.

By the way

If you type "greg flynn raleigh nc" into the Google machine, you'll get the phone number you said you were having such a hard time finding.

Thanks for the call.

Which Greg Flynn would I find?

How could I be sure that the Greg Flynn listed on google is the same Greg Flynn who posts here?

Some people live no where else but the Internet. I thought that someone who was as prolific a blogger might have interfaced with people in real life as well as on the Internet.

I did look up Greg or Gregory for both first and middle names, and Flynn as the last name, on the Wake and the SBOE voter listings. There was no Greg first or middle Flynn last listed on the Wake or SBOE voter search listings. There was one Gregory first Flynn last on both the Wake and SBOE sites - but that person is listed as a Republican.

Wondering why such a prolific blogger is not listed as a voter in Wake County under that name, where he claims to live, I did not feel it would be prudent to just go around and google him and call every number that came up unless I had more information to go on.

I made two calls to people who I know in Raleigh and Wake County who had some sort of connection with Greg on their blogs, and no one had his phone number. I called Angelico - who had a very easy phone number to find, thank you - and even he (you) didn't have his phone number.

So - Greg is assumed by all to be a good Democrat living in Wake County, yet there is no listing for a Democratic voter named "Greg Flynn" or "Gregory Flynn" listed as living in Wake County. Could it be that more information than what was available on the Internet was needed to get a phone number for the OP?

Which is my point about Printelect entirely. I am not saying that Greg Flynn is a Republican - just that sometimes all the information isn't available on the Internet. I feel that more information was needed on the topic as was posted by the OP before asking the question which obviously sucked in so many passionate people into the debate.

Time that could be better spent doing other things - like actually getting voters registered, getting new laws passed, dealing with the enemies of verified voting. You know - living life in someplace other than the blogosphere. Taking care of real life and death problems, etc.

And who are you?


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Off the bloggosphere....

...I lead an exciting life at times. I go out and meet friends for beer, go to political functions, stand outside my precinct and greet voters, canvass my precinct, etc.

If you wanted to reach out and ask anyone in the Wake Democratic party who the Progressive PitBull is, they can tell you who I am. They can even tell you what my favorite beer is. And Wake Progressive Democrats know who I am - I am the guy who buys the beer for our potluck meetings. Which are every 3rd Wednesday at Goodwin House (aka State Democratic Party HQ) in Raleigh.

If you ask the many people who have met me and worked with me in the political trenches, they will tell you I am for real and larger (and louder) than life. ;-)

If you are a Democrat, come on down and meet some real people and stuff some envelopes for the candidates.

yeah, sincerely, fuck you.

There isn't a person on here who hasn't gone door to door for the party or a candidate, handled the phone lines, sat through precinct, county, district, and state meetings, and more.

You're a fuckin' twit, quit pissing in my house and go do something, like play in traffic at night wearing dark clothes..
One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Intimidation doesn't work too well

You emailed me yesterday having gotten my email address from a mutual friend who does not know my phone number and is the only person I know who calls me a "prolific blogger". You coyly gave me your number and asked me to call you. You obviously knew who I was yesterday. I was unable to call last night (taking care of real life) and woke up to your vitriol.

You called me at my work around noon. I asked you to call me at home, then said I would call you at home as I had your number (there is no good time to call me at home). Yet you proceeded to post this nonsense a few hours later. You obviously knew who I was yesterday and again today. I am not responsible for the limitations of your research skills or your inability to read what I write or listen to what I have to say.

9/13/2007 1:58 PM

Hi Greg -

My name is ***** ******* and I read some of your posts on Blue NC about voting machines. I was very curious about those posts, and I saw some other posts of yours and links to Wake Up Wake County. I got up with Stan Norwalk, who gave me your e-mail address.

Would you please give me a call at 919-###-#### at your earliest convenience?

Thanks - ***** *******

You could even have contacted me initially through the BlueNC contact form or the private message feature instead of constructing a conspiracy theory. At this point I have no interest in discussing anything with you by phone or by email as your purpose appears to be harassment rather than communication. There's a difference between winning over people and running over them.

Again, why all this venom?

Something is going on here. There is so much anger being spewed at this post and the author, Greg. Since when do people get so upset about such a straightforward argument? I've never seen such ugliness over such documented research. It reminds me of all the McHenry and Taylor supporters' lame attempts to discredit my work. Only, in this case, it makes no sense.

I think we need again to consider why there is so much of a mean spirit being directed at this post and Greg.

And, FYI, I've done my share of phone banking and door-to-door and grunt work as anyone else. And like, lcloud says, so have most of the people at this site. (AND donated more money and time than what most would consider reasonable.)
 
News of the 10th district: See Pat Go Bye Bye,

Being the peacemaker

that I am (I really am one, you can look it up in the, um...Peacemaker's...Quarterly...Gazette :) ), I have a hunch that many of the folks who have been pushing for verifiable (paper trail) voting have spent quite some time researching and struggling to bring about change, and are especially sensitive to criticism and/or suspicion about a system they've come to accept as a good compromise between non-verifiable digital processing and old-fashioned hand-counted paper ballots.

If this is where the emotion comes from (and I think it is), I hope they can understand the need to verify that drove them is the same need to verify that drives people like Greg to not only investigate, but to inspire others here (at BlueNC) to help him ferret out the truth.

Such truths as: in 2005 (after supposedly becoming Printelect), Owen G. Dunn paid over $20,000 to lobbyists. It's probably nothing out of the ordinary, as there are some 650 entities that paid under $70,000 to N.C lobbyists that year, but I didn't see Printelect on the list:

http://www.democracy-nc.org/moneyresearch/2007/LobbyPrincipal.pdf

You know what? When people question something I believe in and have spent time working with, it pisses me off, too. But that's what Democrats do, right? We question things, and to hell with the establishment and having "faith" in the system. But even when we become the "establishment", and are all wrapped up in the system, we still need to embrace the questioners.

That is all. For now. :)

Thanks peacemaker dude

That makes me less suspicious and more patient with the whole thing. It still seems weird but I get passionate, too, so maybe it's not so weird.
 
News of the 10th district: See Pat Go Bye Bye,

Sadly

Once people get their knickers in a twist, it can get damned nasty.

If the parties involved would agree to meet at some neutral venue, have a burger and beverage, then simpy talk thinks out with the advantages of faces and body language, the matter would be resolved in short order (most of the time).

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Just stopping in to see what all the fuss is about.

PPB, what gives? Other than this thread, your last post here under this name was more than 33 weeks ago. And now you're a frothing ranting mess over alleged aspersions on a voting tech company? There must be some subtext here I'm missing that explains this sudden interest.

I don't mean to comment on the quality of Greg's reporting here — I've stuck mainly to the comments — but he typically stands head and shoulder above the typical blogvillian in this regard. I will point out, though, that this is how stuff gets done: someone gets a lead, chases it a bit, shares what they know and gets community input. You yourself provided some input in this case, and bully for you. You also brought a lot of venom, though, and I'm kind of curious as to why.

surely you exagerate

you bloggospherians need to get a life off line. Surely you can't really call this a frothing mess.

You know, people live lives outside of the bloggosphere. They go down to the General Assembly, they attend meetings, they meet with politicians, they get laws passed.

They go to a law library, clerk of court, Register of Deeds, SOS office, etc - and they actually look at paper or microfilm to find things out - because they realize that there is more to life - and information - than what is on the Internet.

Now that is not to say that people who only do things on the bloggosphere are living under a rock. They do other things as well.

But based on what I do in real life, I saw this posting as possibly the beginning of an attack on our public confidence in elections law. There are people who don't like the state law and want to get rid of it. There are people who don't want to see us have tough federal standards either.

So when someone questions the integrity of the vendor and cites BBV as a source based on a "tip" I get concerned. BBV and many other bloggers who are attacking HR811 and the whole paper ballot/verified voting movement have many reasons for doing so. And I know how some of these enemies of verified voting do things - they don't do them directly - they get others to do it for them. Sort of like astroturf groups. The seeds of doubt get planted and a well-funded group can drive a wedge through what was once popular support for paper ballots.

I see it happening now - but I am not saying that it is actually happening here on this site. I just am wondering what is happening.

Oh No Shit Sherlock.

You know, people live lives outside of the bloggosphere. They go down to the General Assembly, they attend meetings, they meet with politicians, they get laws passed.

Do they drive cars and everything? Do they work for a living? Do you think maybe you might be rushing to judgment here?

The people on this interactive site do more than sit and post. Without even trying I can come up with regular bloggers here who are also County Party officers (myself included.) There are campaign workers, there are Young Democrat activists, precinct leaders, GOTV activists. The people who frequent this blog raise money for candidates, for progressive cause. Many of us are working hard to bring our communities into the 20th century, let alone the 21st when it comes to communication.

BBV and many other bloggers who are attacking HR811 and the whole paper ballot/verified voting movement have many reasons for doing so. And I know how some of these enemies of verified voting do things - they don't do them directly - they get others to do it for them. Sort of like astroturf groups. The seeds of doubt get planted and a well-funded group can drive a wedge through what was once popular support for paper ballots.

I see it happening now - but I am not saying that it is actually happening here on this site. I just am wondering what is happening. emphasis mine. LC

Astroturf? Is that what you think this is? And it sure as hell sounds like you think it's happening on this site.

You haven't spent enough time here to know. And as for well-funded - hah. That's not BlueNC. I don't think the site is perfect, and spirited discussion is really what this is created for.

You are no longer worth the time to read or respond to. Until you post your own story instead of tearing apart someone else on personal levels, I am so fucking done with you.

This is me, shaking the dust from my feet.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

No - I did not say this was astroturf

And people who didn't get involved with the passage of the bill, or who can't take the time to check out a few missing details shouldn't be posting supposedly "innocent" questions from anonymous tips.

And now you know why I don't spend much time on the blogs.....

No, for the record

This site is NOT an astroturf site, IMHO.

Nor do I view the anti-HR811 folks with a jaundiced eye. I do see many of them as misguided or ill-informed, but I have seen no evidence on anything more sinister.

That said, there is the occasional blogger-activist, who does not understand that getting laws passed and reforming politicians cannot be done simply from a keyboard. You actually have to go out and get in the mud with the rest of the public officials.

David Allen

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

There are mud on the shoes on most of the folks here, David.

If any of you spent enough time here to know that, instead of coming in to attack, you would know that. Instead, comments continue to be made referring to other sites and how awful they are, "bloggers need to get a life outside of the bloggosphere (sic)", etc. Way to win friends and influence people.

I am so sick of the personal attacks made by Joyce McCloy and Progressive PItbull (who takes pride in not identifying himself but inviting us to meetings where he provides beer, big fucking deal), that I no longer care what they say or do. They could be the best thing to happen to the NCDP and voting laws since sliced bread and I wouldn't give a damn. If I get a chance; if they're ever actually at an event instead of hiding behind keyboards, I will tell them that to their faces.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Got it backwards

Actually, people get away with a lot of conduct on blogs that wouldn't fly in real life, and I think you've benefited from (and quite tested the limits of) that additional leeway on this thread.

A suggestion: take a few minutes to read back through this thread. Leaving aside the substantive content of the comments, consider how the reactions you're getting might indicate a violation of community standards. You may be one who simply likes getting a reaction, positive or negative, but if you have the kind of successful off-line life that you say you do, you've probably developed a more nuanced approach to interpersonal communication.

I think that if you are able to cut back on the personal attacks (explicit and implied) and focus on clearly presenting your concerns and ideas, you'll find a much warmer reception and possibly a few allies.

And don't call me Shirley.

I <3 Lance

And I am happy to consider your comment the final word in this sordid thread.

Except for this final word:

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

:)

Dude

I know you, and you know me.

This is advocacy. So is knocking on doors. I've done tons of both. You have made some valid points here, as you usually do. But you have also managed to piss people off with your attitude - again, as you usually do.

Just aclm down. We're all supposed to be on the same side.

"85% of Republicans are Democrats who don't know what's going on." -Robert Kennedy, Jr.

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." -Voltaire

Reading through Greg's posts

I would agree he does a fine and commendable job. In this post there has been a regrettable omission.

A simple phone call would have got his questions answered.

Just my observation.

David Allen

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

You are certainly welcome to have such a conversation in public

But such conversation have responsibilities attached.

If you are going to raise questions which insinuate wrongdoing, then you have an ethical responsibility to contact the persons in question and put your questions to them first.

These are not elected officials, they are citizens who run a business, and as such libel and slander laws apply.

And no, that is not a threat, simply an observation. Since I am a publisher, I am VERY cognizant of such distinctions, which is why I mention it.

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Now don't set the standards

that low.

I like to think that we bloggers set a higher standard than traditional reporters.

The revolution will be blogged!

Liberalism as a badge of honor!
No apologies, no excuses.

Pages