₦airaland Forum

Nchenches:
Post here the INEC January statement that it would not use electronic transmission of results to its database connected to a server.

Then let's see how election results were sent by vehicle transport to Abuja from all nooks and crannies of Nigeria.

Nchenches:
Stop shivering.
Breach of trust by INEC is like the kernel of the petition of Atiku.

The political parties entered the election with INEC as umpire based on the assurance of INEC to use Server.

RUGANISTAN:
Igbos are everywhere doing business... Yorubas are everywhere constituting nuisance... Tivs are everywhere prostituting and somehow law abiding, peace loving and God fearing Fulanis normards cannot graze...?

tuniski:
Elections are mainly rigged at collation points. The introduction of e-transmission is to provide an audit trail of the result that will be brought in by the returning officers. If you have already transmitted real time the result, any manipulation becomes glaring and traceable.

This is what #teamAtiku is driving at. The server exist at least INEC has acknowledged that, the contention is Whether they banked the results there. That can only be proven by witnesses who participated in the collation processes. INEC ICT folks and ultimately and conclusively via server inspection.

tuniski:
Yes, where network was bad you upload at the earliest point where you find useable network.

Let apc/buhari focus on the south the petitioner focuses on where and what relevant and sustains his Petition.

tuniski:
Of course the server gives real time result nau. Between you that goes to the bank for deposit and he who does same on e-banking who gets alert first?

hisexcellency34:
You mean 60 bribe takers?

AMI3:
which of the server did the judiciary deny them ? The same that INEC said does not exist?

Let us leave party aside. Why should court not permit them to access the server if they are sincere.

IF THEY ARE SURE OF THEMSELVES THEY SHOULD NOT BE SCARED OF ALLOWING ATIKU TO ACCESS THE SERVER

tuniski:
This is an ignorant post, rigging/manipulation takes place with human contact with the process. E-collation reduces human contact and therefore improves the sanctity of the ballot.

Enyimbamercedes:
The issue here is understanding and you do not understand how the server works. One man alone did not input the results into the server. The server is an aggregation of all the results sent to it from the card readers. After the manual collation of results, they were expected to enter the results from the manually collated sheets on the hand device and transit to the server where it was aggregated. My question therefore is why is there a difference?

Enyimbamercedes:
Read what you have written and ask yourself this question. WHY?

Why is there is difference?

Which result is easier to manipulate? The “manually” collated one or the one transmitted to the server?

When you are ready to be objective in your reasoning, only then will you truly understand. Till then, bask in your ignorance

searchlight:
PDP is arguing that the results were transmitted electronically by the officers of the inec at the pulling centre to the server but probably on going up to lg inec office or state inec office the results were tampered which made it different from the one already sent to the server at the pulling unit. I'm not PDP lawyer but I seem to understand their argument.

pchukwudi:
Unfortunately, INEC does not use your opinion to run elections.

Better to learn quietly and be mistaken for an informed fellow, than to flaunt your opinion and erase all doubts.

pchukwudi:
Proof of server existence is very EASY.

Simple, how did INEC conduct voter verification with card reader if there was no server. It's 100% IMPOSSIBLE to do that.

If they insist that they do not have a server, they will by necessity accept that they did not do voter verification with card reader. In that case, the election will have to be canceled.

pchukwudi:
There's a huge difference between:
1) proof of 100% server usage in result collation and
2) proof of server existence.

The case here is not about proving that the server was 100% used for result collation.

The case is about INEC denying that its server exists.

Atiku's application was for SERVER INSPECTION. Not for result validation.

Why is INEC denying the existence of its server (contrary to its own documented public assertions) if no evidence of illegality can be found following a thorough audit/inspection of the server?

Seriously, you guys should stop being stupid.

tuniski:
Those are extracts the documents are bulky and detailed.

tuniski:
It shows results of all parties/candidates including invalid/rejected votes. What you are referencing were abridged.

Mowoe:
First I'm neither Igbo nor a supporter of Atiku before some tribalists start mentioning me irrationally; as a matter of fact I voted for Buhari and argued so many times in his favor in 2015.

To my point, Atiku's server results may have been falsified or the figures may have been inflated, but one thing is certain and it's the fact that there is a 'Server' and that 'Server' as far as I learned stores results transmitted. INEC has seized every opportunity to deny the fact that it has a server. Why would INEC instruct POs to transmit results if the transmitted results were only going to hang in the air? There's no need denying the existence of a 'Served' unless INEC has something to hide.

Mowoe:
I went for the INEC Ad-Hoc staff training but did not participate in the conduct of the elections. I remember vividly during the training, the SPO (Supervisory Presiding Officer) rightly said after the votes had been counted, the results were to be written on the results sheet (Form EC8A, i think); and after the general conduct of the election, the results for each party were to be entered in the SCRs (Smart Card Readers). The SPO laid emphasis up on the fact that the results on paper had to tally with the SCR's.

He said after the results had been entered, the SCRs would automatically calculate the data entered,
after which the PO (Presiding Officer) would connect the SCR to the interenet by means of Data or Wifi and then transmit the results to "INEC's Server" wich is the central point for all results transmitted by SCRs. He said this is in a bid to curb electoral fraud and because whatever results was written on paper would tally with those on the SCRs, it would be impossible to manipulate results on Paper as INEC would already have the results on its "Server" which tallies with what was on paper initially.

For INEC officials to claim they do not have a server is completely false. Where did the results collated and transmitted via the SCRs go? INEC is just one compromised body, just like other 'independent Organizations' in the country.

In conclusion, INEC has a server; I doesn't matter how much they try to deny it.