|
Since I personally have been voting absentee for
well over a decade; in fact I am registered as permanent
absentee. I haven't actually walked into an actual
polling place in longer than I can remember.
So I have a different perspective on this, and I know
the checks they build into the system. It would be a
real stretch for someone to impersonate my ballot. I
defy anyone to try and succeed.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 11/23/2020 12:24 PM, Mark - Myakka Technologies
wrote:
|
Re: [AFMUG] OT: this press
conference Ken,
I believe it is far fetched that this was some
type of coordinated effort to cheat. I also
believe that is is far fetched that the voting
machines were tampered with. Finally, I doubt
these recounts are going to change anything.
But, I would like a real audit of the absentee
ballots. I would like them to pull a random
sample of absentee ballots to check to see if
the person is a valid voter. Are they alive,
are they still residents of the county, etc.
I think Georgia would be fairly accurate. I
belive they did a voter roll purge a few years
ago. That was one of the issues with Stacey
Abrams. She got her panties all in a bunch,
because they removed 1000's of stale voters from
the rolls.
I don't know if any of these other states have
purged their rolls lately. I'm guessing the
ones that have not may have a higher percentage
of bad absentee ballots. At the end of the day,
I don't think they will find enough votes.
--
Best regards,
Mark mailto:m...@mailmt.com
Myakka Technologies, Inc.
www.Myakka.com
------
Monday, November 23, 2020, 1:53:37 PM, you
wrote:
|
In the transactional
world of certain people, I appointed
you, so you decide in my favor. I don’t
think that works with Supreme Court
Justices. They may not be everyone’s
favorite judge, but they’re still a
judge, not a total buffoon like the
“elite strike force” “release the
Kraken” lawyers. I would be surprised
if SCOTUS touched any of this. I have
my doubts about Kavanaugh’s love for
beer, but otherwise, they are only going
to accept a modest level of crazytown.
I also believe that is 99.9% the case
with election judges, ballot counters,
secretaries of state, etc. Media and
both parties would have you believe they
will act solely according to party
affiliation. I think mostly they just
do their job, even if they wish the
outcome were different.
Much of what we see is projection. If
that were me, I would totally do these
crooked things, so let’s assume that’s
what everyone would do. Nobody could
possibly just be doing a job the best
they can, with no other motives.
From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>
On Behalf Of Steve
Jones
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020
12:27 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users
Group <af@af.afmug.com>
Subject: Re:
[AFMUG] OT: this press conference
Unless there is a direct constitutional
question, scotus has no business being
involved. The fact that scotus is even
in play is a direct consequense of the
decades of judicial politicking
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 12:14 PM Bill
Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
|
The Supremes
are going to refuse to get
involved; if they are asked,
which I'm on the fence about.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On
11/23/2020 10:06 AM, Steve
Jones wrote:
|
This
shit is neverending
entertainment. They put
the crazy lady up as the
lead, then shitcanned
her, but she didnt stop
and theres no
infighting. Pennsylvania
is back in play in the
courts. Media runs with
some judge dismissing
something like it's
relevant, theyve bending
it for 4 years, that's
just a step in the
process to get things to
the supreme court.
Either way I see armed
conflict prior to
inauguration. One side
wants to bury everything
and one side wants
sunlight on everything,
then if it doesnt bear
fruit they want it
dissected and sunlight
on its guts.
They're gonna fuck
around and get biden
disqualified after it's
to late and then the
bigot harris will be in
play. We dont want that
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020,
11:29 AM Adam Moffett
<dmmoff...@gmail.com>
wrote:
|
https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/first-person-gop-challengers-we-faced-open-intimidation-detroit
https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/first-person-i-was-detroit-poll-challenger-gop-came-make-havoc
Two poll
challengers in
Detroit with
different
perspectives
about what they
saw at the exact
same polling
place.
I do see general
agreement on the
events though.
A volunteer
busybody follows
people around
and questions
everything they
do. They get
annoyed and say,
"buzz off, talk
to my
supervisor".
The Democratic
challenger says,
"the GOP poll
challenger was
being douchey
and asking
accusatory
questions. Also
racism."
The Republican
challenger says
"All I did was
ask questions
and they got all
douchey about
it. Also I was
intimidated/oppressed."
On
11/23/2020
11:33 AM, Bill
Prince wrote:
|
That's
the sort of
thing you'd
expect from
Huffpost or
TheOnion.
Kind of
apropos
though.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 11/23/2020 7:50 AM, Ken
Hohhof wrote:
|
Back to
the press
conference,
either Fox
News has
totally turned
against DJT,
or someone
paired the
wrong headline
and photo.
From:
AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On
Behalf Of Steve
Jones
Sent:
Monday,
November 23,
2020 9:06 AM
To:
AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group <af@af.afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT:
this press
conference
The intent was
that an isp
couldn't
throttle
competitor
traffic in
preference of
their own, but
in true
bureaucratic
fashion they
purposefully
left it vague
so it could be
reinterpreted
at whim.
On Mon, Nov
23, 2020, 7:55
AM Adam
Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
wrote:
|
The 2015
Open Internet
Order didn't
do even 1/10th
of the things
attributed to
it. It had
nothing to do
with
congestion,
censorship,
freedom,
service
pricing, etc.
The rules were
no blocking,
no throttling,
and no paid
prioritization.
All three
rules had the
exception for
"reasonable
network
management".
Reasonable
management was
not
specifically
defined, but
in discussion
it was said to
be driven by a
technical need
rather than a
business one.
So the
blocking and
throttling we
all do to make
traffic flow
properly was
ok and nobody
was ever going
to pay any of
us for
prioritization.
I've never
been convinced
that the rule
was necessary.
It seemed
like a rule
saying ISP's
can't build
moon
rockets....like
ok I'll stop
my Apollo
project
immediately.
The actual
rules were
trivial to
obey and I'd
bet almost
nobody here
was ever
breaking them
My only
concern was
Title II
status could
open the door
on additional
rules that
might be more
onerous later.
On 11/23/2020 8:40 AM, Mike
Hammett wrote:
|
The
original Net
Neutrality had
nothing to do
with congested
upstream or
peering ports.
Why force your
competition to
be less bad?
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
From:
"Darin
Steffl" <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com>
To: "AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com>
Sent: Saturday,
November 21,
2020 9:48:05
PM
Subject: Re:
[AFMUG] OT:
this press
conference
If net
neutrality
comes back,
there will
likely be
similar
exemptions for
ISP's less
than 100k
subscribers or
whatever the
number was
before.
It shouldn't
affect us in
any real way.
It will force
the big ISP's
to be good
(better?) guys
and not let
peering cross
connects fill
up and become
congested for
example.
On Sat, Nov
21, 2020, 9:45
PM Seth
Mattinen <se...@rollernet.us>
wrote:
|
On
11/21/20 7:36
PM, Ken Hohhof
wrote:
> But as
amusing as
this may be,
it might be
time to start
looking at how
> the next
administration
could affect
WISPs. Like a
3-2 Dem FCC
and a
> new
Chairman
(woman?).
Will Net
Neutrality and
Title II
return? Does
> it
matter?
>
Net neutrality
seems likely
to make a
comeback.
Would it
change
anything
I do? No, but
it might add
annoying
paperwork.
Worst case
someone thinks
I'm doing
something and
files a formal
complaint,
which would
waste time
having to
answer it.
--
AF mailing
list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com |
--
AF mailing
list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
|
--
AF mailing
list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com |
|
|
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com |
|
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com |
|
|
|
