I was recently reminded of an analysis I’d started a long time ago and never finished. I sat down this morning at about 10am to write a few words about it. However, a few questions had to be answered first, and that meant spending all day working on those answers.
I am flustered to understand wholly the intricacies of your fabulous work. So, what I may add here may be already known or be redundant.
“It looks like the true date all out of range numbers were assigned is in the middle of 2007. And yet, almost all Shingle numbers, which are all out of range, were assigned before mid-2007.
(This implies that the registration dates are either false or grandfathered from a previous version of the database.)”
What was going on inside the voter registration data base in New York in the middle of 2007 has to be considered with what was going on on the outside at the time. The HAVA lawsuit by the DOJ against NY and the change over from lever machines…to the modern computer system et al.?
The statewide voter registration list, NYSVoter, was fully implemented in the summer of 2007. The system was developed on a Microsoft platform.
In 2005, the Commissioners of the State Board of Elections decided to use the Washington State voter registration system code and documentation and contracted with Saber Corporation (??) to redesign the Washington model to meet NY requirements for a larger number of voters.
“Saber Corporation 26+ Years of Senior Care Software Development
Founded in 1994, our company was started by a team consisting of a Multi-Purpose Senior Center Director and two programmers with a combined 28 years of experience. Our reputation as the most flexible and affordable software package for the management of needs of Senior Centers, Area Agencies on Aging, and State Units on Aging is a reputation we hold dear.”
Transfer of the ownership of the voting systems in New York from individual cities, towns and villages went over to each County Board of Elections. Prior to this change, only the City of New York, Monroe, Nassau and Suffolk owned their own voting machines.
One of the goals was to create a new uniform statewide voter registration list.
The 62 county boards are each responsible for registering voters in their county. They must keep the lists accurate and current, removing individuals from the list who are no longer eligible to vote in their jurisdiction. Under HAVA the SBOE created a statewide list by integrating with the current county voter registration systems—2007.
What does “purging” amount to? Is it just a flag like active/inactive? Are all the other pieces of information about the record retained? If so, all these purged records might be used as a bank of registrations that can be “unpurged” when required, and then voted. If you look at snapshots of the data over time, a red flag would be seeing any purged record become active again.
A random thought I had is maybe the shingle algorithm is to the database what the spleen is to the human body. (According to Siri, the spleen is like a large lymph node and acts primarily as a blood filter. It removes old red blood cells and holds a reserve of blood (which can be valuable in case of hemorrhagic shock) and also recycles iron.)
Maybe Claude could weigh in, if not in comparing the shingle to the spleen, then perhaps in opining so as to possibly produce the missing piece of the puzzle.
Another random thought -- remember that one Commissioner who said why not bring the questioners in and answer them directly -- you know, the guy the others canned and replaced after such an out of line (to them) thought like that? Wouldn’t it be cool if he was somehow able to talk now to the questioners on his own? (As long as he wouldn’t end up like the Boeing whistleblower.)
1) In a more Perfect World, seems like you'd be able to Pair-Up with a State BoE Data person that really knows these records. That they could help answer questions or confirm issues in the rolls!
2) Does the Shingles Algorithm help you discover the edge between in-range and out-range?
3) Seems with the ability for a Voter to return to NY and gain their VoterID back, the larger blocks or sequential wouldn't be this large or they'd be rare in occurrence! Seems like your better way to identify false and clone records in my opinion.
Bonus Comment/Question:
Would it be better if older ages Purge Voters were actually removed from the rolls? The old voter roll systems grandfathered in?
(I think my question assumes that all old citizens possible passed away, which there are probably all age groups)
I am flustered to understand wholly the intricacies of your fabulous work. So, what I may add here may be already known or be redundant.
“It looks like the true date all out of range numbers were assigned is in the middle of 2007. And yet, almost all Shingle numbers, which are all out of range, were assigned before mid-2007.
(This implies that the registration dates are either false or grandfathered from a previous version of the database.)”
What was going on inside the voter registration data base in New York in the middle of 2007 has to be considered with what was going on on the outside at the time. The HAVA lawsuit by the DOJ against NY and the change over from lever machines…to the modern computer system et al.?
https://elections.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/10/2009-amended-state-plan.pdf
On pages 9 and 10:
The statewide voter registration list, NYSVoter, was fully implemented in the summer of 2007. The system was developed on a Microsoft platform.
In 2005, the Commissioners of the State Board of Elections decided to use the Washington State voter registration system code and documentation and contracted with Saber Corporation (??) to redesign the Washington model to meet NY requirements for a larger number of voters.
“Saber Corporation 26+ Years of Senior Care Software Development
Founded in 1994, our company was started by a team consisting of a Multi-Purpose Senior Center Director and two programmers with a combined 28 years of experience. Our reputation as the most flexible and affordable software package for the management of needs of Senior Centers, Area Agencies on Aging, and State Units on Aging is a reputation we hold dear.”
https://www.sabersite.com/our-company
https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/View.ashx?M=F&ID=1035883&GUID=A9E45AD0-EA0B-46CC-B05C-15FE183583D7
Under minutes from the September/October 2007, NYSBOE meeting:
“ITU
George Stanton reported that the audits for all the counties information for
NYSVoter have been completed. Everything seems to be working properly and
everything is complete and the database was finished before the deadline and at a
lower cost estimate.”
Did they go cheap at the expense of security?
“Preliminary discussions are underway with the NYSVoter
Steering Committee to plan for monitoring the county boards of elections
maintenance activities on an on-going basis.”
https://elections.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/10/approved11072007minutes.pdf
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/16/nyregion/mayor-says-states-delays-may-muddle-2007-elections.html
Transfer of the ownership of the voting systems in New York from individual cities, towns and villages went over to each County Board of Elections. Prior to this change, only the City of New York, Monroe, Nassau and Suffolk owned their own voting machines.
One of the goals was to create a new uniform statewide voter registration list.
The 62 county boards are each responsible for registering voters in their county. They must keep the lists accurate and current, removing individuals from the list who are no longer eligible to vote in their jurisdiction. Under HAVA the SBOE created a statewide list by integrating with the current county voter registration systems—2007.
What does “purging” amount to? Is it just a flag like active/inactive? Are all the other pieces of information about the record retained? If so, all these purged records might be used as a bank of registrations that can be “unpurged” when required, and then voted. If you look at snapshots of the data over time, a red flag would be seeing any purged record become active again.
A random thought I had is maybe the shingle algorithm is to the database what the spleen is to the human body. (According to Siri, the spleen is like a large lymph node and acts primarily as a blood filter. It removes old red blood cells and holds a reserve of blood (which can be valuable in case of hemorrhagic shock) and also recycles iron.)
Maybe Claude could weigh in, if not in comparing the shingle to the spleen, then perhaps in opining so as to possibly produce the missing piece of the puzzle.
Another random thought -- remember that one Commissioner who said why not bring the questioners in and answer them directly -- you know, the guy the others canned and replaced after such an out of line (to them) thought like that? Wouldn’t it be cool if he was somehow able to talk now to the questioners on his own? (As long as he wouldn’t end up like the Boeing whistleblower.)
Interesting comments, but nothing to add.
Three things... If I can remember them as I type!
1) In a more Perfect World, seems like you'd be able to Pair-Up with a State BoE Data person that really knows these records. That they could help answer questions or confirm issues in the rolls!
2) Does the Shingles Algorithm help you discover the edge between in-range and out-range?
3) Seems with the ability for a Voter to return to NY and gain their VoterID back, the larger blocks or sequential wouldn't be this large or they'd be rare in occurrence! Seems like your better way to identify false and clone records in my opinion.
Bonus Comment/Question:
Would it be better if older ages Purge Voters were actually removed from the rolls? The old voter roll systems grandfathered in?
(I think my question assumes that all old citizens possible passed away, which there are probably all age groups)
-Mo