> most of them won't have someone with that level of thinking
That is an unfair take on it. Come out to the midwest and talk to some of the clerks in the small townships and counties out here. They do know the value of improved data and tech. And they know that investing in better tech can result in a little less money in the bank, which results in less gas to plow the roads, less money to pay someone to mow the ditches, which means on more car wrecked by hitting a deer. So the question is often not about CSV vs. PDF. It is about overall budget to do all the things that matter to the people of their town. Tech sometime just doesn't make the cut.
Besides, elections tend to have their own tech provided by the county or state, so there is standardization and additional help on such critical processes.
People running the smallest of government entities in this country tend to have pretty good heads on their shoulders. They get voted out pdq when they don't.
I'm not convinced by that argument. The data is clearly already in a spreadsheet of some sort already. I don't think "click export as CSV" v.s. "print out as paper and scan as PDF" is a cost decision.
This isn't meant as shade! I have full respect for people working in those roles. Knowing the difference between a CSV file and a PDF file - and understanding why there are people out there who curse the existence of PDFs and celebrate CSVs - is pretty arcane knowledge.
Also note that I blamed people in "a decision making role" - changing procedures requires buy-in from management. People in management roles are less likely to be thinking about CSVs v.s. PDFs than the people actually executing on the work.
As Derek pointed out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44320001#44322987 this may often be a vendor limitation - in which case there is a cost factor to consider, and the blame can also be shared between the vendor and the person who made the purchasing decision without understanding the difference between PDF and CSV export.
> elections tend to have their own tech provided by the county or state, so there is standardization and additional help on such critical processes.
There's fifty states and almost 4000 counties in the US, not to mention territories. Even if it was only fifty different standards, that's still an overwhelming amount of work and exactly the problem you're replying about.
To get all the states and counties using the same standard? Very impossible. That's the very crux of the tenth amendment. We don't even have consistent traffic laws from state to state.
That is an unfair take on it. Come out to the midwest and talk to some of the clerks in the small townships and counties out here. They do know the value of improved data and tech. And they know that investing in better tech can result in a little less money in the bank, which results in less gas to plow the roads, less money to pay someone to mow the ditches, which means on more car wrecked by hitting a deer. So the question is often not about CSV vs. PDF. It is about overall budget to do all the things that matter to the people of their town. Tech sometime just doesn't make the cut.
Besides, elections tend to have their own tech provided by the county or state, so there is standardization and additional help on such critical processes.
People running the smallest of government entities in this country tend to have pretty good heads on their shoulders. They get voted out pdq when they don't.