General Question

crazyguy's avatar

Is it possible to prove (or disprove) election fraud without access to the ballots?

Asked by crazyguy (1441points) 6 days ago

Ballots are guarded more closely than transcripts of Presidential phone talks with foreign leaders. So how can anybody say that there is or is not evidence of election fraud?

In many states, taking a selfie of your completed ballot and sharing it on social media is a crime. See
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/secrecy-of-the-ballot-and-ballot-selfies.aspx

Many other states modified existing laws to permit voluntary disclosure of how an individual voted. However, the actual ballot in the possession of the election officials is guarded from everybody.

If there is any fraud in elections, it cannot be proved or disproved without an analysis of actual ballots. For instance, if you suspect a forged signature, how can you prove or disprove it without a comparison of the two signatures?

Therefore, can we just disregard all statements about whether there is or is not any election fraud?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

68 Answers

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Yes but Rump will try anything to become King forever !

zenvelo's avatar

That’s why observers are allowed to observe the ballot count. Observers can challenge a ballot if it does not meet legal standard. That was why “Sharpiegate” was brought up, even though the claim was found false.

Voting officials take an oath, and are subject to charges of perjury for any false statement. So when a Republican official says a full audit of all the counties in Georgia has demonstrated that Biden won, it is time to Shut The Fuck Up.

And quit spreading lies and innuendos that bring our democracy into question.

LuckyGuy's avatar

I was a poll worker and election inspector for this election.
There are many checks and balances – I won’t go into them all here but as an engineer and a numbers guy, I was quite confident in the process. Here are some of the checks:
At the start and end of the day, unused ballots were counted. The difference needed to add up to the number of ballots used. (the numbers matched perfectly – but if they didn’t there was an inspector from each party who would record and sign off on the discrepancy) This reminded me of working at McDonalds decades ago and how they counted drinking cups and paper products and cross referenced with the meat patties.

As to voting, the actual ballot info went 3 places.
When ballots were cast, live tally information was going to central.
There was also local electronic storage on each machines
and finally, the actual ballots were saved.

The number of votes cast needed to match all 3.
Inspectors read the electronic tally, the electronic storage for each machine and added them up. They matched perfectly. If there was a discrepancy (there wasn’t) then the actual ballots would be checked. A certain number of machines were audited. even though there was no question.
At every step there were observer or workers from each party. There were no disagreements.
There was more but I am not going to spend more time on this.

He is doing everything he can to stay in power – even if it means tearing up the Constitution he touts and fomenting unrest while claiming to be on the side of Law and Order.

JLeslie's avatar

I have friends who worked the polls in a few different states and they describe it similar to LuckyGuy. Both parties work together, there are multiple checks, there are observers, there is often legal council if a question arises. It’s all very thorough.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Therefore, can we just disregard all statements about whether there is or is not any election fraud?

We can disregard statements without evidence.

LuckyGuy's avatar

The person claiming fraud should agree to a few random audits at his cost and then accept the results. If the results are as stated he needs to apologize to the American people for attempting to do more damage to our democratic process than any Russian interference.

crazyguy's avatar

@LuckyGuy Thanks for your response.

However, what you are describing is what happens after the ballot is cast. If a ballot is cast in-person, presumably the identity of the voter has been verified. What did you do to verify the identity of the mail-in voter?

@zenvelo You are absolutely correct that observers are allowed. However, I am not certain that they are close enough to really tell what is going on. For instance, in Michigan, observers were required to stand 6 feet away from the actual ballots. How can you do signature matching from 6 feet away?

LuckyGuy's avatar

Mailed in ballots were numbered and assigned codes. Signatures were matched to the signature on file when the person registered. The registration required a form of government issued identification Drivers license, soc sec, or passport, etc.
Only one vote per person is permitted so if a person came into the poling place and tried to vote after receiving a mail in ballot their in-person vote took precedence and caused their mail in ballot to be not counted. We had zero cases of that error or attempt.
I personally logged in about 350 people with about 10% who requested mail in ballots but did not use them.

crazyguy's avatar

@LuckyGuy Finally! Finally, I have found somebody on Fluther that I can have a dialog with! I truly appreciate your responses.

I have a few follow up questions:

1. Were you personally involved in signature verification of mail-in ballots?
2. Is it fair to say that none of the other safeguards you mention (numbering and coding of ballots) can ensure that the ballot is cast by the right voter?
3. Is it fair to say that signature verification can be kind of rushed? For instance, see
https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor-joecks/victor-joecks-signature-verification-is-a-joke-heres-how-i-beat-the-system-2072456/
4. Is it ok to give voters a financial incentive to vote? Or not vote? See
https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor-joecks/victor-joecks-nevada-group-offered-gift-cards-for-voting-and-a-state-agency-promoted-it-2187045/

jca2's avatar

@crazyguy: ”n Michigan, observers were required to stand 6 feet away from the actual ballots. How can you do signature matching from 6 feet away?

I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want someone sitting on top of me when I do my job, especially during a pandemic. I am in my office right now looking at the chair across from my desk (guest’s chair) and it’s about six feet away. That’s a comfortable space for a visitor to sit, so they are not on top of me. Any closer is really personal space. Only if someone is showing me something on my computer, like if my boss is explaining how to do something, are they within a foot or two.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Finally! Finally, I have found somebody on Fluther that I can have a dialog with!

Finally, someone tells you what everyone has been telling you for weeks. How exciting.

crazyguy's avatar

@jca2 You are right. I would not either. However, if the observer’s job is to certify that he can confidently state that everything was done by the book, s/he may have to invade the worker’s personal space.

crazyguy's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay If that is what you really believe…

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Plain observations are not beliefs.

LuckyGuy's avatar

@crazyguy Yes I did the signature verification for the 350 or so people who I personally logged in and issued a ballot to. They would tell me their name. I would type it in and immediately find them or get a couple of matches of people with the same name. I’d ask their address and that would immediately find them except for a couple of cases where there was an adult son and father with the same name. Of course I had their dates of birth right in front of me so I could guess if it was the father of the son but I would still ask for birth day. That would clinch it. I’d then turn the screen around and ask them to sign. Their old signature would pop up on my screen after they signed. They always matched.

Side note in one case I had the birth date for the father and the son, same address, same name but different birth dates and years about 20 years apart. I thought the guy was the son! It wasn’t. It was the dad. The son was standing behind him. I had to comment and break professionalism. I said something like “Holy mackerel! Whatever you’ve been eating I want some of it!” The guy was in his low 50s looked better than his 30s son who clearly considered eating as a hobby. Wow. Diet and exercise .

If the signatures did not match I was to ask for ID.

Rarely, (twice, I think), the system asked me to ask for ID. Apparently the people who registered gave incorrect or incomplete info when they registered. In both cases it was for a change of address that had either not gone through the DMV records yet or they moved after registering.

jca2's avatar

@crazyguy: Cameras would help in lieu of being in someone’s face during a pandemic.

JLeslie's avatar

I know someone who did signature check in Memphis for mail-in ballots. There was a Democrat and Republican at every table checking the same ballots. If they found a problem with a signature they set it aside or called over a supervisor. He said the biggest problem with signatures was people not signing the ballot rather than a mismatch problem. He didn’t know if TN tries to cure the problem when it occurs. If there is no information on the envelope maybe they do nothing, I don’t know. In my state they try to contact the voter to give them an opportunity to fix the problem. You know, to try to make sure everyone who voted has their vote counted.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy The person who checks signatures has no idea who the person voted for. The signature is checked with the envelope still sealed.

seawulf575's avatar

if more votes are cast than the number of registered voters in an area vote. Voter fraud has just been proven.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie You are absolutely correct. However, the address where the envelope originated, is, in many cases a dead giveaway, wouldn’t you say?

crazyguy's avatar

@seawulf575 Absolutely. Yet Michigan certified the election results “after absentee ballot poll books at 70% of Detroit’s 134 absentee counting boards were found to be out of balance without explanation.” See
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/11/17/wayne-county-canvassers-deadlock-certifying-november-3-election-results/6324274002/

seawulf575's avatar

Another way is to look at the age of the people. 118 year olds don’t exist. If they voted, it’s voter fraud.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@crazyguy

~ ~ ~ Maybe you should be on Trump’s legal staff, they’re bailing when brought to court to make a statement that there was something illegal.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@seawulf575 Pleeze give us your wisdom and SOURCES !

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy My address was not on the ballot. Just my signature, email address, and phone number. If you mean certain polling centers are likely to have more for one candidate than another, that’s true, but it is not 100%. You could be throwing out a vote for your guy. Both parties checking the ballot take care of the question though doesn’t it? The percentage of bad ballots was very low from what I understand. I think because people were more aware of doing it correctly and there was more help available to do it correctly this time.

Did you vote by mail? I don’t remember. I only ask, because people who didn’t vote by mail sometimes are not familiar with all of the steps, which make them more vulnerable to some of the scare tactics being pushed about mail-in ballot fraud. I’m not saying fraud is impossible, I have never said that, but I think it is unlikely, and fraud happens in person also. It also happens in both parties.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@crazyguy “absentee ballot poll books at 70% of Detroit’s 134 absentee counting boards were found to be out of balance without explanation”

Your link says, “The mismatches varied anywhere from one to more than four votes.” No honest person shrieks about inconsequential errors among tens of millions of votes.

So I expect you to continue shrieking.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I did vote by mail (I always do) but cannot recall if my address was on the envelope or not.

However, I have been reminded many times that there is more than one way to identify a ballot. Each ballot is numbered and has a code. Per @LuckyGuy “Mailed in ballots were numbered and assigned codes. ”

However, I would like to say one thing about mail-in ballots. Speaking just theoretically, are there or are there not, more ways to mess with them than with in-person ballots?

crazyguy's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay I saw that number. And agonized over including the link.

However, being an accountant/engineer, I sweat over any unexplained discrepancies. I have been known to spend hours trying to track down a few pennies on a financial statement. Not smart. But to me, any discrepancy that cannot be explained is possibly just the tip of an iceberg. It has not happened often, but I have found systemic problems because of a trivial unexplained discrepancy.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy My envelope and ballot was numbered. From what I understand some states don’t number the ballot, only the envelope, I don’t know if that is correct. When the ballots are coming through the mail, people don’t know what address the ballot came from, the average person doesn’t have the information for the number code. People working in elections have all these people keeping an eye on each other and everything.

There can be discrepancies if a ballot was fed in wrong I guess, or if two were stuck together, there are human errors that can occur, and I am sure they do. That is why recounts almost always produce different results, but it’s is usually a very small margin.

Is there more ways to commit fraud with mail-in? Well, maybe. Some things being called fraud I don’t feel are fraud. Helping people vote is not fraud. Voting in someone else’s name is fraud.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

Republican Michigan Senate leader after Trump twists arms to defy the voters and throw the election his way: “We have not yet been made aware of any information that would change the outcome of the election in Michigan and as legislative leaders, we will follow the law and follow the normal process regarding Michigan’s electors, just as we have said throughout this election.”

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Thanks. You have become the first person to admit that maybe there are more ways to commit fraud with mail-in ballots than with in-person ballots.

Now ask yourself a corollary: why did Democrats go to such extraordinary lengths to increase the percentage of mail-in balloting? And, please, do not say that it was because of the pandemic.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy Because of the pandemic and because they wanted to give more Democrats the ability to vote. You aren’t against letting our citizens vote are you?

NOT because they can commit fraud.

Edit: Let’s say there was no fraud and Biden won because more people voted for him. Is that hard to believe? You don’t know people who voted for Trump last time who voted for Biden this time? You know there was a huge push to get out the vote both Republican and Democrat, which probably resulted in more Democrats voting who hadn’t before than Republicans. No sin in getting out the vote. It doesn’t have to be fraud for Biden to have won, does it? That’s how you are making it sound.

crazyguy's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay Are we veering away from your previous post?

No matter. If Trump has an ounce of critical thinking left, he will give up on 2020, and start plotting his return in 2024 after the Democrats self-destruct.

seawulf575's avatar

@crazyguy “No matter. If Trump has an ounce of critical thinking left, he will give up on 2020, and start plotting his return in 2024 after the Democrats self-destruct.” I disagree. If he just concedes and focuses on 2024, we will play out this same scenario then. Whether he wins this election or not, there needs to be something done about the voting scams. Otherwise, we will never have an honest election ever again. Trying to win in 2024 would be a moot point. Identifying and correcting the bullshit is an absolute must right now. As Sidney Powell put it, this should have been dealt with decades ago, but the politicians don’t want to try fixing it.

LuckyGuy's avatar

@seawulf575 Please read this investigation into the claims of dead voters. PLEASE.
He claims are a mismatch of data bases at best or just straight up lies.

@crazyguy. What time is it? Check your watch, In fact, check all your watches. Check your clock radios, check your phones. They differ it might be a seconds or nanoseconds but they differ. That sounds like a discrepancy and needs to be investigated.

The claims of fraud bring to mind Russel’s orbiting Teapot argument: “Prove to me there is no teapot orbiting around the sun.” There is no teapot orbiting the sun – unless Russia put it there.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie As I have stated before, I think we should make it as easy as humanly possible for every qualified voter to vote. I have also suggested that the easiest way for people to vote would be the same way we do Fluther = online. However, it is extremely critical that the process be perceived as fair by all voters. Otherwise, as stated by @seawulf575, “we will never have an honest election again”.

Biden may have won legitimately – but neither you nor anybody else will be ever able to prove that especially since mail-in ballots are separated from the signature envelope making an audit of the process impossible!

crazyguy's avatar

@LuckyGuy I think the examples you state are not applicable. I stick to the rather obvious fact that mail-in ballots are easier (in theory, I am not alleging this happened) to manipulate than ballots cast in-person. This fact is buttressed by a quote from a story that I saw this morning:

“Kemp also asked Raffensperger to do a sample audit to compare voters’ signatures on mail-in ballots but the secretary of state has said that’s impossible at this point because the ballots are separated from the outer security envelope during the counting process, according to CBS News.”

I have repeatedly asked posters on this thread and others to acknowledge that, in theory at least, mail-in ballots are easier to manipulate than ballots cast in person. Since there has been only one poster who has reluctantly agreed with that rather obvious fact, we know that there is little or no objectivity among the posters here.

seawulf575's avatar

@LuckyGuy The question is if it is possible to prove or disprove election fraud without access to the ballots. In my mind, if a dead person votes, it is pretty much a slam dunk that voter fraud happened. Are you trying to say that if a dead person voted, it isn’t proof of voter fraud?

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy I do remember you saying that now that you mention it again. My response stays the same that I like the paper trail and less change of hacking.

Is it hard for you to believe that people in MI, PA, and AZ who voted for Trump in 2016 flipped to Biden? It seems most obvious to me that those states would have the most people moving from Trump to Biden. GA was most likely just the matter of getting the vote out among minorities, but also GA continues to receive Democrats from other states as their big cities grow.

seawulf575's avatar

In my mind, if you wanted to make the as foolproof as possible, every ballot, whether mail in or in person, would be kept. If they are run through a machine to count the results, the paper is still kept. Mail in ballots need to have their envelopes stapled to the paper ballot after it has been run through the machine. That would ensure later auditing could be done to ensure the signatures all matched. At the end of the voting, the paper ballots all need to be counted to ensure the number of paper ballots matches the number of votes tallied by the machine. Additionally, at the end of each day the ballots need to be tallied by hand to ensure the physical ballots match the results from the machine. If there is a discrepancy, no results can be issued until the physical ballots are counted by two different sets of people to ensure the numbers all equal out.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 In my state our ballot and envelope both have a matching number code. If you attach the envelope then the privacy would go away. There’s risk to privacy even with the number code, but I think it’s wise to have it. From what I understand some states don’t have the code on the actual ballot.

I don’t know how long the ballots are kept. I would think at least until the electors vote.

When someone goes in person to vote they don’t have an envelope, so I’m not sure why it’s so important to keep it all together with a staple? I’m pretty sure once the ballot is removed from the envelope the ballot and envelope are in completely separate containers. I say that, because video I have seen is ballots being fed into the readers, and it’s a stack of ballots. Plus, the ballot is in a secrecy sleeve to further ensure the voter’s name is not seen with the ballot.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie I’m struggling to figure out why the ballot has to be anonymous. Personally, I don’t care if people see how I voted. I’m also a big fan of the idea of Voter ID. Each district has a list of registered voters. I don’t see why it is so unreasonable to show that the person voting is (a) who they say they are and (b) actually registered in that district.

JLeslie's avatar

Secret ballot is one of the mainstays of the American voting process.

It’s how wives vote differently than their husbands. It’s how citizens vote freely without worry that a person in power can retaliate.

In America we feel safe speaking our minds against the government, but maintaining these various protections is good practice for when there are threats to the system.

Right now we have our voting system being tested. Pressure is being put on governors, secretaries of state, election supervisors, and now even legislatures and electors to go against the voice of the people. All of these layers matter. It’s an interesting thing to witness. Maybe it shows some pluses and minuses not thought of before, or not thought of in the last 100 years, about our system.

One reason I have a problem with the Iowa caucuses is it isn’t secret ballot.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Where exactly is the paper trail when the signature has been separated irrevocably from the ballot?

crazyguy's avatar

@seawulf575 If people really want paper, I would say your solution is not only required, but the only way to ensure the possibility of a later audit.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy I doubt they throw out the paper until everything is official. The papers are all still in storage now is my guess. If you want to hunt for an envelope or ballot I would assume you could. Hopefully, they are bundled by the date received so it would be easier to narrow down a ballot or envelope if you need to find it. My ballot and envelope have a preprinted number code—both items have my code.

Electronic voting has no paper trail.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Please read the following:

”“Kemp also asked Raffensperger to do a sample audit to compare voters’ signatures on mail-in ballots but the secretary of state has said that’s impossible at this point because the ballots are separated from the outer security envelope during the counting process, according to CBS News.”

Now comment.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy That state might not be coded. Like I said, some states have ballots without codes, they do it to protect anonymity. From what I understand that is the case in Oregon. Actually, rereading the quote, I don’t see why signatures can’t be compared if they still have the envelopes, what they probably cannot do is find the ballot that goes with the envelope if they determine a bad signature. The chance of finding enough bad signatures is ridiculously low.

So, I am back to 2021 is a perfect time for states to come up with best practices for the next election. Talk to each other, see what worked well and where there were problems. The major obstacle is some states have people and politicians who don’t want to give everyone a fair chance to vote.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Let me understand what you are suggesting.

Let us match signatures to the voter database. And flag non-matching signatures. While this will not tell his who the suspected voter voted for, it will give us an estimate of how many erroneous signatures there were. I think that is a good idea, if you add prosecution of the voters in question.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy Well, I am not sure how you trace the ballot back to who turned it in IF the person says they did not cast the ballot. Like, let’s say a ballot is cast in my name and the signature does not match. Elections calls me up to fix my signature, and I say I never voted. Who turned in that ballot? It would be hard to trace back. I used to be against signature match, but my mind has been changed on that point.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie If the envelope in question can be traced back to you, would it be unreasonable to expect you to answer how the envelope ended up in somebody else’s hands?

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy If I gave it to someone else to vote, wouldn’t I say I voted to cover my ass? I don’t get what you are after? People know there will be a signature match.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie If you gave it to somebody else to vote and you do not know which way they voted, you may be in worse trouble by saying you voted. What I am after is that there has to be some penalty to discourage similar behavior in the future.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy It’s already illegal. Voter fraud is illegal. I don’t believe people are just turning over their ballots to other people and letting the other people vote for them. What’s the incentive? Are they being paid? If they take money I am betting that is means to bring them up on charges.

seawulf575's avatar

@crazyguy I wouldn’t say it should necessarily be on @JLeslie (in your example) to explain where her envelope went. You could ask the person whose vote was supposedly cast where their envelope/ballot went if it wasn’t them. It could be they gave it to someone else. But suppose it was never delivered to them in the first place? What if it got taken out of a mailbox before she got it? What if it got sorted into a pile along with a whole lot of other ballots at the USPS and the entire pile went to one location? If you asked for a mail in ballot, you might be waiting and waiting for it while someone else has already cast it.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie @seawulf575 Thanks for your comments on my example (really it was @JLeslie who started with the example).

“Voter fraud is illegal”. Correct. However, until there is prosecution and punishment, few people believe it.

“You could ask the person whose vote was supposedly cast where their envelope/ballot went if it wasn’t them.” In the example that would be @JLeslie. She would have to confirm whether she received it or not, and if she did receive it, who did she give it to?

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy Let me make sure I understand your question. In your scenario I give my BLANK ballot to someone else.

As for prosecution, people do go to jail for voter fraud.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie All we know at the time somebody knocks at your door is that your ballot was defective – there was some question about the signature and/or the way it was transmitted to the election authorities and/or it was an overvote. So when they ask you a question, they have no idea as to what caused the defect. If they determine that you were personally involved in attempted fraud, they might prosecute you. However, if you stated that you never received the ballot, they would have to prove you did, or they cannot prosecute you.

Now, a paid ballot harvester would never approach you. (I have never been approached). However, if mail-in ballots are sent to every voter on the rolls, it may be possible to find some people who, for a few bucks, may be willing to part with their ballots. This kind of fraud is extremely hard to prove, BUT is not possible with in-person voting. For this reason, nobody has any idea how much of it happened in Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan or Wisconsin. Was it enough to swing the election? Probably not. Should it be investigated? Absolutely.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy The way I see to fix it if you are very paranoid, is to have cameras at locations where people turn in ballots, and where the ballots are turned in have them scanned as they are turned in.

Your problem is the likelihood that there is massive fraud is extremely low. Massive fraud in multiple states even a lower chance. The reality that AZ, MI, GA, and PA all flipping shows the dissatisfaction within the citizenry.

Maybe we go to the Mexican way—a president gets one term and we don’t have this reelection concern.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Since we have an even more important election coming up in January, I think we have to make certain that the election shall be legitimate. I think the only way to assure that is to examine every possibility of fraud in the Nov 3 election and eliminate that possibility.

JLeslie's avatar

Is January the GA election? I think the republicans have a really good chance. A lot of people like a check between the branches of government. It will be interesting. I know people driving to GA to try to get out the vote with young people who are more likely not to even know there is an election happening or bother to vote.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

At what point do people recognize that someone is a tiresome bore asking questions in bad faith? Here is a list so far. It may not be complete.

How exactly are we ensuring the accuracy of mail-in ballots?

What is the point of a recount without confirming the validity of counted ballots?

Is it possible to prove (or disprove) election fraud without access to the ballots?

How exactly are we ensuring the accuracy of mail-in ballots?

Was there a reason for Democrats to push so hard for mail-in ballots?

How do you prove that a ballot was mailed on time?

seawulf575's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay Does it bother you to have other Jellies posing questions about voter fraud? If so, stop addressing them. Oh! and it is boor, not bore.

Call_Me_Jay's avatar

@Call_Me_Jay It isn’t questions, it is the one question over and over and over.

It isn’t an earnest question. It’s clogging the discourse with junk.

seawulf575's avatar

Did you just address yourself in an answer?

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: See, this is proof of your intellectual superiority.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther