So, how'd the VOTING go?
Subject: So, how'd the VOTING go?
I heard the scanners were messed up at PS 282 early this morning in Park Slope (I think it's been fixed)How was your polling station?
Comments
-
Our polling station in bed-stuy was calm and efficient. I asked the workers if the scanners had been working well and they said yes.
Lots of the lights on the booths were broken so some people were having problems reading. Also the type on the ballots was comically small. I could read it fine, but I imagine some people would have problems with it.
Seemed like low voter turn out though. -
At John Jay on 7th Avenue in Park Slope everything was calm at 11:30. There was a line of about 5 people ahead of me when I got there, but the room was not at all crowded. Everything worked smoothly.
-
I got in and out at St. Mark's and Classon. Rather like the new system...
-
Boygabriel wrote: Our polling station in bed-stuy was calm and efficient. I asked the workers if the scanners had been working well and they said yes.
A ballot magnifying sheet is available at the polling site, according to the voting guide. Also, a "ballot marking device" is supposedly available, although I'm not sure whether this just refers to the pen provided.
Lots of the lights on the booths were broken so some people were having problems reading. Also the type on the ballots was comically small. I could read it fine, but I imagine some people would have problems with it.
I don't like that you don't get a confirmation screen that the votes logged matched what you picked once the sheet gets scanned. I'm definitely worried that there's a chance for shenanigans at some point. I hope they keep the physical scantron sheets as a paper record in case the results are ever disputed so that they can go back to the real original votes. -
Carnivore wrote: A ballot magnifying sheet is available at the polling site, according to the voting guide. Also, a "ballot marking device" is supposedly available, although I'm not sure whether this just refers to the pen provided.
I heard someone call out "Do you want a ballot marking device?" so I'm guess it's different than the pen. There were clear plastic magnifying sheets in the booths, but the elderly man in front of me wasn't told about it by the lady who handed him a sheets and pointed out the columns, told him to fill in the circles. Out of the five or six scanners at PS282, two were on the fritz. But the line went fast.
I hope they keep the paper too. Dang. It does not inspire confidence, that's for sure. -
had some issues at 8:45am at ps 9 on underhill. no line, easy system, but not really sure my vote counted. i scanned the ballot, and the machine read something like "ballot counted, blah blah ERROR contact election official." her reaction? "well, it said ballot counted so your vote was counted. this happens all the time."
and just before that, a woman asked before scanning, "how will you know this is MY ballot if my name isn't on it? did you take my card and note that it's this machine?" the election official said "it's anonymous-we don't attribute to each person." uhhh....
----------------------------------------
edited cause i wrote ps 80 instead of ps 9 @ 80 underhill...
-
Subject: Re: So, how'd the VOTING go?
pitu wrote:
Overrun with bake sales :evil:
How was your polling station? -
smooth sailing at PS20 in Crown Heights
-
I used to be a judge of elections and am always just surprised at how polling places are run.
Yes, I was in/out in 15 minutes, but there were not too many people! The inspector (person giving out the voting card, ballot, etc.) took 13 of those minutes to seem like she was beyond flustered and confused and had no idea what was going on -- it was nuts. I voted at 3:30pm -- this should not be something new.
I also really don't like that people could stand behind me while voting. The booths to mark my ballot were in 2 rows so that my back was to the people standing in line to get their ballots. They could easily see what I was marking, and that seems wrong to me. I know that it seems stupid, but why aren't there booths with curtains and whatnot any more?
Also, I wish it gave a print out or a screen confirmation to say what you voted for. Who knows what actually happened.
Also, I think it is just hilarious that for just ME (1 person!) to vote, it required a paper ballot, a paper voting card, a paper in the log-book to sign in, a "how to vote" paper, and a paper folder to use when carrying my ballot just to scan it into a computer. Why not just click on a screen? If I can do all of my banking online, do all of my work projects through email, and allow the city to put all state/city test scores/attendance/contact info for all 1.1 million school kids online .... why isn't voting a but more advanced yet.....seems wasteful.
**edited because I typed too quickly... -
As you are likely aware, the Board of Elections is a very troubled agency.
http://www.cidny.org/content/cidnyweb/Guide_to_Troubleshooting_Voting_Problems_at_the_Polls_on_Election_Day.doc
The recent firing of its head is one of many attempts to fix its long standing issues
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/27/nyregion/27board.html
...but let's keep talking about their performance today: -
How was PS 316? That's where I am heading tonight.
-
I was at John Jay. It was pretty smooth and easy, but it was quite different from the last time. It definitely seems a lot more complicated too. I miss the old fashioned machines with the metal levers. They gave a nice satisfying thunking sound when you voted.
-
smooth at 321
-
There was a longish line at 261 at 8:30ish so I cam back an hour later and there was no line at all. I figured it was busy because people had to get to work,
http://whatyourdonotknowbecauseyouarenotme.blogspot.com/2010/11/i-vote-and-i-run.html -
i'm karl the druid
and i approve
this message -
I voted at PS 80 about 9am and the place was very crowded and disorganized. It's embarrassing that in the computer age the Board of Elections still relies heavily on pen and paper. It reminds me of how not too long ago the MTA was relying on paper and pencil to track the progress of the subway. Or how the City of NY still uses a 19th century ledger-based paper timekeeping system to record the work hours of most of its employees. My wife and I had to go to three separate stations (one to sign in, one to complete a paper ballot, and one to have the ballot scanned). The last line was so long it snaked in several directions. Also, it seemed that it shouldn't have taken so many staff members to cast a ballot. All in all, another lesson in government inefficiency.
-
that is some crazy voting system. Seems like it was designed by somebody who has no clue how computers work. Additionally, its really time consuming, dark, and how much space is gonna take to store all those ballots? yICK, tHAT is not so good.
-
I didn't get knifed, clubbed, bricked, or killed. Major improvement over 1823.
On the electronic voting/error issue, that's inexcusable. You should have a way to verify your vote days later, or months or years later. Electronic voting systems should keep track of it. You should be able to demand it, and access it online immediately. -
The system Jack describes was in effect at the Museum.
-
PS 316 was running smoothly considering it was pretty crowded at 6 pm. Once I got my ballot I was out of there in a matter of minutes. The worst part of voting is the heat in these schools!
-
xlizellx wrote: I used to be a judge of elections and am always just surprised at how polling places are run.
this. i could have written this about the silly epic of ps 22 this evening.
Yes, I was in/out in 15 minutes, but there were not too many people! The inspector (person giving out the voting card, ballot, etc.) took 13 of those minutes to seem like she was beyond flustered and confused and had no idea what was going on -- it was nuts. I voted at 3:30pm -- this should not be something new.
I also really don't like that people could stand behind me while voting. The booths to mark my ballot were in 2 rows so that my back was to the people standing in line to get their ballots. They could easily see what I was marking, and that seems wrong to me. I know that it seems stupid, but why aren't there booths with curtains and whatnot any more?
Also, I wish it gave a print out or a screen confirmation to say what you voted for. Who knows what actually happened.
Also, I think it is just hilarious that for just ME (1 person!) to vote, it required a paper ballot, a paper voting card, a paper in the log-book to sign in, a "how to vote" paper, and a paper folder to use when carrying my ballot just to scan it into a computer. Why not just click on a screen? If I can do all of my banking online, do all of my work projects through email, and allow the city to put all state/city test scores/attendance/contact info for all 1.1 million school kids online .... why isn't voting a but more advanced yet.....seems wasteful.
**edited because I typed too quickly... -
Voting went smoothly, but who the hell designed the ballots? They are the worst-designed things I've seen. They make the old lever device look well-thought out. Information was poorly organized, fonts were incredibly small (and my eyes are 20/20), the referenda were buried on the back in a mess of other information. Add to that the ridiculous process for voting involving going to an info table that directs you to your district table (where the people didnt' seem to know what I should be given) who then direct you to the voting cubicle with your "privacy sleeve". The cubicle is full of a bunch of junk that further confuses the task at hand (magnifying thingy, instructions, lots of other papers) and then you have to go to another area to scan the thing and, natch, you get no record of your vote! It's a mess and the geniuses that drew up this ballot and voting process should be out on the street.
-
Did not like. Prefer the (mechanical) machines - if I'm going to use a pen/pencil, I want a human to count it.
-
yes easy in and out on Clermont and Myrtle. I liked the new system, it was fast and efficient. The staff was super nice.
Something made me laugh, the 2 cops glued to their text messaging devices and their big bellies hanging there, making sure they were paid for not doing nothing at least... yeah... texting at least probably made them feel productive in some ways... these guys look so lazy and out of it sometimes... -
Voted at PS 321 around 2:30. Not crazy crowded but a line of 5 people because 2 of the 3 machines were broken.
I would say 15 minutes from start to finish.
Of course the first booth I went to fill out my ballot, some dumb ass stole the pen. -
remember the sample ballots they used to have that matched the layout on the lever machines? they were poorly organized but you could read them. and they were about a yard wide. now they have to fit everything on paper that fits in a scanner so the type was tiny. i tried using the magnifier but had trouble with that, i think because the light was so bad (in the gym at ps 316 on sterling place). but it's also kind of tricky when you're looking through the magnifier to land the pen on the right dot. so gave that up and went back to squinting. i'm pretty sure i voted for carly fiorina for governor and legalizing pot.
-
ps 9 at 815. decent turnout. lots of confused people, bd of elections and voters, alike. 20 min start to finish
-
As a graphic designer I agree the graphic design of the ballot wasn't great. Fonts were too small, and it was too hard to read.
That being said, I can't really think of a better option. There are simply too many candidates and/or issues to vote for.
I guess you could have an even bigger piece of paper, or multiple sheets? I dunno... -
8thandPrez wrote: Voting went smoothly, but who the hell designed the ballots? They are the worst-designed things I've seen. They make the old lever device look well-thought out. Information was poorly organized, fonts were incredibly small (and my eyes are 20/20), the referenda were buried on the back in a mess of other information. Add to that the ridiculous process for voting involving going to an info table that directs you to your district table (where the people didnt' seem to know what I should be given) who then direct you to the voting cubicle with your "privacy sleeve". The cubicle is full of a bunch of junk that further confuses the task at hand (magnifying thingy, instructions, lots of other papers) and then you have to go to another area to scan the thing and, natch, you get no record of your vote! It's a mess and the geniuses that drew up this ballot and voting process should be out on the street.
For future reference, you can avoid the information table by knowing your election district number. Election district numbers can be found by typing in your address on the NYC Board of Elections website, or by calling 311.
That won't help you with your other complaints, but it will help you skip one line and a step in the process. -
Boygabriel wrote: As a graphic designer I agree the graphic design of the ballot wasn't great. Fonts were too small, and it was too hard to read.
in illinois, each voting booth had a binder of laminated sheets with the candidates, etc., printed on them and a gap in the middle. your ballot was just a sheet of numbered bubbles -- which means the unused ones could be used in a future election, an idea i remembered wistfully when seeing the hundreds (thousands?) of unused ballots for just my election district that will surely be trashed, as if the money to print them sprang from nowhere. you slid the ballot under the binder (simpler than it sounds) and used a stylus to punch out the appropriate holes. the gap shifted to the right as you turned pages, so each office was on its own column of the ballot. since the binder said which number bubble was for which candidate, you could check that you'd voted as you intended.
That being said, I can't really think of a better option. There are simply too many candidates and/or issues to vote for.
I guess you could have an even bigger piece of paper, or multiple sheets? I dunno...
these are the famous butterfly ballots, and no, they're not prefect. it was a little tricky to be sure you'd followed the line to the correct bubble (though candidates were spaced far apart, so you weren't likely to say, vote for buchanan when you meant gore), and having good eyes helped. it would have been better if the bubbles had been bigger.
but they were still a hell of a lot better than this.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds