Has anyone noticed these workers putting ballots in different bins after getting the black light treatment, as if they discovered a ballot that's different than others?
Anything is possible. There has been no mention of watermarks from the info which has been released, which leads me to think they are looking for differences in inks.
The UV light will expose differences in inks when compared to an authenticated ballot.:
Paper Examiner 3 -Tactile & Light Examination
a. Examine the physical ballot.
b. Note any differences or observations about the thickness or feel of the ballot and if necessary, attach thickness designator.
c. If Election Day Poll vote, note the presence of a visible fold.
d. If non-Election Day Poll vote, note the absence of visible fold.
e. Confirm Fold Designator on file name is correct (Designators)
f. Note any visible differences in the colors or text on the ballot.
g. Place Ballot under UV-B and UV-A source and compare to representative specimens.
The UV light will expose differences in inks when compared to an authnticted ballot.
Has anyone noticed these workers putting ballots in different bins after getting the black light treatment, as if they discovered a ballot that's different than others?
You could probably guesstimate the number of invalid mail-in ballots just by watching the count for 5-10 minutes.
Precisely. Assuming the ballots are randomly sampled, watching about a hundred of them will give you a pretty good idea of how many may be defective.
How do you tell if they're defective. Do they put those in a different box?
To me being a retarded fag it could mean watermark... But like i said...
Anything is possible. There has been no mention of watermarks from the info which has been released, which leads me to think they are looking for differences in inks.
https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/mail-in-voting-election-integrity-safeguards_508.pdf here's the safeguards.
That, and pressure where a human would’ve circled in a marking or a printer/press