[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# RE: VA Cert test

- To: <support@gesn.com>
- Subject: RE: VA Cert test
- From: "Cathy Colgan" <cacglobal@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 14:53:02 -0500
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <PPECJKNKLDJLKJPKPPIOEECGDCAA.ken@gesn.com>

    Sorry, Ken but you have to speak slowly to me:  Clarify:

    We can use the "already" printed ballots IF we reprogram in VTS?

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-support@gesn.com [mailto:owner-support@gesn.com]On Behalf Of
    Ken Clark
    Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 1:40 PM
    To: support@gesn.com
    Subject: RE: VA Cert test

    > From: owner-support@gesn.com [mailto:owner-support@gesn.com]On Behalf Of
    > Steve Ricke
    >
    > The remainder of their 30+ units are IF Model
    > "C" readers.  The cost to upgrade these units to VL is substantial and
    > should be billed to the customer.

    FWIW, my understanding was that this was just one location (ie, one unit).
    Upgrading 30+ units is obviously a nonstarter unless the county wants to
    foot the bill.

    > It would be far more cost effective to reprint the ballots and choose a
    > jurisdiction using VL units for GEMS Certification.

    My understanding is that they are *already* laid out and printed using GEMS.
    No reprint is necessary here.

    > 	---The City of Portsmouth bought their units during the production
    > transition period from IR to VL readers.  Why model "C"?  The parties
    > responsible for that decision are no longer with Global.

    Indeed.

    Bottom line here appears to be Ian's one sentence reply.  Change locations.

    Ken

- Follow-Ups:
  - RE: VA Cert test
    - From: "Ken Clark" <ken@gesn.com>

- References:
  - RE: VA Cert test
    - From: "Ken Clark" <ken@gesn.com>

- Prev by Date: RE: VA Cert test
- Next by Date: RE: VA Cert test
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread