Zetter provides a clear description of the discovery of the problem and an intuitively clear idea of the programming cause of the problem. Followup to some other regions using the Diebold/Premier software is also presented. Logs are shown not to be logs. There is, unfortunately, no indication if is being used in Minnesota.

This is how election problem stories should be written. Complete details, clear explanations, interviews from every angle, links to sources, and it doesn't use the word "glitch" at all. Context includes a few other states and clarification that this is not the same bug as another Premier bug.

A lot of the articles about machine counting of votes report worries and concerns that computer science people have about the machines. This one reports in detail about an actual problem, how it occurs, and how it was identified. Excellent article!

Again, a red hot topic and it's given a news summary treatment. What gives?

While it might be of great interest to those who distrust voting machine companies, especially Diebold, it doesn't deliver a story of much importance. The information is factual and the presentation fair, but the subject matter itself doesn't rise above the arcane and incidental. This is a good local story about good public servants that got amplified by the internet. I rated this work fairly low because of that, not because the writer didn't do an excellent job of writing and investigating.

This is a very well-detailed, well thought-out article that chronicles the problems with Premier/Diebold Inc.'s Global Election Management System software (also known as GEMS) from touch-screen and optical-scan voting machines. I particularly like how it describes over-deleting the various "decks" of ballots (in some cases, not existing in the first place!) as well as the document for the working solution.

standard of research and sourcing