|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
== seeVote ==
seeVote 15:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)seeVoteDanseeVote 15:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC) your current info for seeVote is wrong.... its misleading .. and will continue to confuse a very confusing subject to begin with.. please take the time to understand that seeVote is a theory .. nothing to sell ... by reverting to the erranous definition... you are doing a disservice to people trying to understand how important seeVote is to restoring democracy in USA. ... PLEASE NOTCE THE REVERTED WRONG definition links to the same website at I am quoting. Pleaes fix .. i am done trying. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.30.60.155 (talk • contribs) .
- I'm sorry, but Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, and all contributions must further conform to the manual of style. Please try to rewrite these ideas in your own words, and discuss changes on the talk page before implementing. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks ! I am stuck, tho.
You suggest I re-write the definition of seeVote. It would be wrong for me to write something different than what I wrote on the seeVote website, since I took alot of research to write seeVote in the first place, it does not make sense for me to re-write it for you. I wrote it correctly the first time ..so you all would not screw it up .. but instead you insist on reverting to the WRONG definition of seeVote.
Follow the link from your wikli .. to the ACTUAL seeVote.com website.. you can see for yourself that your wiki is InCORRECT..
Either take off the link or correct the definition please.
I am only attempting to prevent your wiki from broadcasting OBVIOSLY wrong and misleading inforamtion about my invention.
you suggest I write seeVote in my own words. now what? It IS IS IS in my own words ... I invented seeVote. thanks for taking the time to understand the situation. If I could describe seeVote in other words .. then I'd use those words for the website too.
PS ..seeVote.com is not copyrighted. Your are too quick to judge! Where does it say it has a copyright?
Maybe I should make the seeVote website wrong .. so that you will accept the correct definition .. then Ill revert the website back.. but that seems silly.
I thank you for your time, seeVoteDan
Also, from your own Manual of Style http://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=&lang=&q=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style :
"Clear, informative, and unbiased writing is always more important than presentation and formatting."
I am sure somewhere it says CORRECT information is more important than ERRORS too.. please take the seeVote entry off your site .. if you refuse to correct it.thank you. Please goto seeVote.com contact page and ask them what they should do... then you'll be talking to me.. and we can resolve this. thanks. you're the greatest!!
- From how I read your website, it seems like a reasonably accurate summary. Perhaps your website is not as clear to others as you think? By my understanding of copyright issues, everything is copyrighted (you do not have to assert copyright) unless the copyright holder specifically releases it into the Public Domain or applies another licence to it such as the GFDL. David Underdown 15:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
seeVote 03:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)seeVoteDanseeVote 03:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC) David Underdown said: "Perhaps your website is not as clear to others as you think? " Perhaps, the need for clarification! ...ie my article update. get it? have you made my point for me?
I agree with you about the copyright issue. I, as sole holder of its copyright agrees to you publishing correct information about my self-copyrighted invention/theory. I do not grant you permission to broadcast wrong information about seeVote.. Certainly you may not link your wrong article to seeVote.com either.. only link the proper description .. found at the website. Please help me.
Your current wiki description states: seeVote... "produces two ballots (one for voter to keep; the other for a locked ballot box)"
This is misleading since seeVote keeps both ballots locked in two differnet places, counted by two different efforts (a precincts traditional counting system and the seeVote system of verification on the internet) ..etc..
Funny, I got a google alert today telling me how eBay now has seeVote in its wiki.. it came from your wrong article that I am desperately trying to change:
http://listing-index.ebay.com/games/SeeVote.html
get it? this is very painfull to all our effort of people here helping me with seeVote.
"Reasonably accurate to you" is exactly why I need to have this corrected. I hope my explaination of the issue is as important to me as it is to you.
I respect your time on this last issue ..and will accept a final careful judgement from your thoughts after a more careful reading of the wrong wiki article Vs. the correct definition on the seeVote website, which, by the way, should at least prove that your wrong article should STOP linking seeVote.com. thank you.
I'd rather you link your article to Diebold. sheesh.
Just incases you had time to try the last demo version here it is .. I am currently working on version 5 of the demonstration .. not available yet. thanks so much! http://www.seevote.com/version4/introduction.html follow the links to the interactive demo. peace.
seeVote 12:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC) I finally read "The five pillars of Wikipedia" and I appreciate your efforts here much much more. I will be brief: I am attempting to write an objective article for your wiki.. it will be interesting for me to rethink seeVote in a more objective perspective. See how I do. until then, can we please fix the wrong article? thank you