>My conclusion is that if more people would take responsibility for voting accurately, then your point would be moot.

But if one type of machinery habitually produces more ballots with problems than other types, isn't it reasonable to say that at least part of the problem is related to the machinery?

>victims of a voting process that has been basically unchanged for 30 years.

I don't know how valid an argument that is. I don't think the people having problems are the ones who've been voting on punchcards for 30 years.

Seems to me that Florida (particularly some of the relevant counties) has a lot of new population every election. Where I live, an awful lot of people retire to Florida. If you've been voting on machines all your adult (which is true if you're from a lot of places in the Northeast), the first few times you're faced with a different voting mechanism, you well might have problems with it. And if the mechanism has a higher error rate than others, the two issues seems to feed each other.

Tamar