2 points of reflection we didn't take in consideration
from the CISA statement (top left) it says some ballots, do we have an idea of how the system works? In this case i'd think, there would be system to apply them semi-randomly, for example each X or each range / numeration etc etc, so that, it can be checked if you know the 'algorithm' / serialization method, but without it you wouldn't know on which one to print it on (ex POTUS and few closed other could have prepared the list of ballots to watermark leaving the other to know yes that there will be watermarks, but without knowing how to apply them exactly by the correct logic)
on the Alex Padilla paper, it says 'Watermark and tint must appear on the ballot itself, not only on the stub, so if that's the case UV check wouldn't be needed, when they do that then, are they checking maybe the type of underlying paper / tincture or like, a second undisclosed series of watermarks? They said it would have been there and they gave the standard for it, technically, but knowing that DS would have cheated anyway, maybe they let them fake anyway a first level mark, and added a second secret layer?
![CISA Ballot Watermarks Confirmed. Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming. Watch The Water [Marks]. [They] Cheated In 2016 & Got Caught. [They] Never Thought She Would Lose. Now [They] All Lose. The 2020 Election Was A White Hat Military Alliance Sting Operation. [They] Cheated. Trump Won All 50 States.](https://files.catbox.moe/6bm6xx.png){kind=link}
2 points of reflection we didn't take in consideration
from the CISA statement (top left) it says some ballots, do we have an idea of how the system works? In this case i'd think, there would be system to apply them semi-randomly, for example each X or each range / numeration etc etc, so that, it can be checked if you know the 'algorithm' / serialization method, but without it you wouldn't know on which one to print it on (ex POTUS and few closed other could have prepared the list of ballots to watermark leaving the other to know yes that there will be watermarks, but without knowing how to apply them exactly by the correct logic)
on the Alex Padilla paper, it says 'Watermark and tint must appear on the ballot itself, not only on the stub, so if that's the case UV check wouldn't be needed, when they do that then, are they checking maybe the type of underlying paper / tincture or like, a second undisclosed series of watermarks? They said it would have been there and they gave the standard for it, technically, but knowing that DS would have cheated anyway, maybe they let them fake anyway a first level mark, and added a second secret layer?