Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Votes received during the audit in County Audit Report? #750

Open
sfsinger19103 opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 5 comments
Open

Votes received during the audit in County Audit Report? #750

sfsinger19103 opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@sfsinger19103
Copy link
Contributor

(per RLA Tool Feedback #1_tool version2)

Suggestion (not requirement) from CDOS:

[In County Audit Report] it might be useful to know how many votes each candidate received during the audit, and how many were discrepancies or not.

It's not clear to me what exactly the suggestion is: is it the candidate (audited) vote totals from audited ballot cards alone? Or total votes, "correcting" any discrepancies found during the audit? My guess is, for each candidate three columns:

  • Corrected vote total (original vote total plus net votes corrected by audit)
  • Number of cards whose audit increased the candidate's vote total
  • Number of cards whose audit decreased the candidate's vote total.

If I understand correctly, this would require tracking things we don't currently track (discrepancy per candidate, not just per contest).

@dmzimmerman
Copy link
Member

You understand correctly, and we will not be adding this feature.

@dmzimmerman
Copy link
Member

I also don't believe that CDOS saying "it might be useful" makes this a "CDOS Priority."

@nealmcb
Copy link
Contributor

nealmcb commented Sep 21, 2017

There is certainly no need to add this under the contract for November 2017.

Implementation of #601 will allow the counties to make these calculations themselves.

The corrected vote total in particular would be a worthy addition to the report some day.

@dmzimmerman
Copy link
Member

Tracking this information would require either (1) an almost complete rearchitecture of how audit results are actually computed and tracked over time, or (2) recalculation from scratch of these numbers every time a report is generated. I find neither to be a palatable option for the forseeable future.

@sfsinger19103
Copy link
Contributor Author

I also don't believe that CDOS saying "it might be useful" makes this a "CDOS Priority."
@dmzimmerman

I use "CDOS Priority" label to make sure that I close the loop with CDOS on anything they explicitly mention.

Feel free to change the name of the label to "CDOS Request", or to make a second label of that name, or to suggest some other solution. Just let me know.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants