Bugs? We don't have no stinking bugs...
Nov. 16th, 2005 12:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jenkAccording to Republican Party state Chairman Chris Vance: "[T]he GOP had prepared its list by comparing the street addresses of voters with those of private mailbox businesses and storage complexes" but
Maybe instead of something like
select voters.* from voters
join storage on (storage.streetnum=voters.streetnum
and storage.street=voters.street)
they could try something like
select voters.* from voters
join storage on (storage.streetnum=voters.streetnum
and storage.street=voters.street
and storage.geo=voters.geo
and storage.city=voters.city
and storage.zip=voters.zip)
This should have been found in a quick code review. Stupid parochial thinking ("addresses don't repeat enough to worry about"). But then, it would ALSO have helped if their list of voters' addresses was the actual registration addresses, not mailing addresses. At least that's what I assume - given that the Rs challenged "[v]oters who are registered at their home addresses, but have their ballots and other elections-office mail sent to private mailboxes."
Oh: apparently it never occurred to party leaders that storage complexes might have resident managers. Perhaps a few phone calls before placing the challenge would have helped clear that up?
Source for quotes and example addresses: local paper
"its database expert had not compared cities or geographic designations."A couple examples of the problem with this thinking:
| Address listed on the voter list | Address of UPS store or storage complex - not a legal address to register one's ballot |
| 320 Cedar Street Seattle | 320 Cedar Avenue Forks |
| 2311 45th Ave. S.W Seattle, WA | 2311 N. 45th St Seattle WA |
Maybe instead of something like
select voters.* from voters
join storage on (storage.streetnum=voters.streetnum
and storage.street=voters.street)
they could try something like
select voters.* from voters
join storage on (storage.streetnum=voters.streetnum
and storage.street=voters.street
and storage.geo=voters.geo
and storage.city=voters.city
and storage.zip=voters.zip)
This should have been found in a quick code review. Stupid parochial thinking ("addresses don't repeat enough to worry about"). But then, it would ALSO have helped if their list of voters' addresses was the actual registration addresses, not mailing addresses. At least that's what I assume - given that the Rs challenged "[v]oters who are registered at their home addresses, but have their ballots and other elections-office mail sent to private mailboxes."
Oh: apparently it never occurred to party leaders that storage complexes might have resident managers. Perhaps a few phone calls before placing the challenge would have helped clear that up?
Source for quotes and example addresses: local paper
