When I say "attributed to error", I didn't mean just "random machine error". Or I would have said that. With words that describe. I chose simply the word "error" so as to imply the multiple types of error there are. Did you know? Human error is a type of error! Human error does not happen consistently! I can only assume you didn't know, or you wouldn't have said such silly things like

"Any error would have been consistent across the entire set of scanners". And that is how I know you know nothing about computers or manufacturing! That is ABSOLUTELY not how things work. You get duds in mass-produced shipments of electronics all the time, and the rest of the box is fine. You can buy 20 brand new computers, the same type, from the same person, set them up and all have them run the exact same inputs, and within a week you could see differences in some of the machines if you're unlucky.

I would love a link to "the vast majority" were set to 19 instead of 20, instead of the 1200 ballots I heard from the Lake team.

And yes, it is conjecture, since you apparently don't know what conjecture means either. It is conjecture that the scanner settings changes were malicious and anything other than a result of trying to get the scanners to print. It's very weak conjecture since those 1200 ballots were counted, so failing to see the harm there. It is not conjecture that settings were changed, which the State has not disputed. Settings being changed as a result of the product not performing the intended action is not against the law.

Now, this would be a big whole to-do and a massive issue if those affected ballots were never counted. But they were counted. So the best fraud the Lake team could come up with is some people had to wait longer than they wanted to vote. They couldn't prove harm or intention, and they couldn't get anyone willing to perjure themselves. The Lake legal team messed up.