The petition in court, and noise about stolen mandate hinges on gap between C and D.

Few questions to ask -

1. The data in C, does it match data at origin in B?

2. If D is inaccurate, is it possible to still use data in C to validate winner of election.

3. If D and C are both inaccurate, drop back to origin in B where the data was collected. Each party agent representing their candidates signed and authenticated the form to be correct and accurate. Use Form EC8 to validate winner.

4. In addition to challenging gap between C and D, which is a technical ground, Peter Obi must bring BVAS entries and FormEC8 to court as evidence to show tampering and denial of his rightful place as the winner.

5. Court declared a disclaimer when the petition opened and said ruling will not be on technicalities. Peter Obi need hard evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was cheated and the election was grossly a fraud, and as victim of that fraud he is begging the court for reliefs, which can include a disqualification of INEC as an unbiased referee, a void of the election itself and the erasure of all statutory rituals so far attained since May 29th.

Given what LO and Obi presented in their petition, it is not tenable to substitute Obi as winner. He has no mandate, it is all an illusion.

Very nice try, please use a software to generate it again.

You started the process map with a decision point, instead start with something like, Candidate present self for verification.
Also the error is not even between C and D, it is only on part of D.
The upload to INEC server may have worked, it is the iREV upload that has been confirmed not to have worked in real time.

Nice one

This is very bad illustration

This makes sense

ojesymsym:
Very nice try, please use a software to generate it again.

You started the process map with a decision point, instead start with something like, Candidate present self for verification.
Also the error is not even between C and D, it is only on part of D.
The upload to INEC server may have worked, it is the iREV upload that has been confirmed not to have worked in real time.

Nice one

Decision point is directly below the statement box, you are incorrect for calling it the starting point.

The flow is concerned with the contention over data, not candidate eligibility.

Irev is just a mirror of bvas. If the mirror failed to reflect the object, then go to the object and inspect if its data matches EC8.

Debating transmission, whether manual or electronic, is only technical. When you transmit something it means you changed its state and gave it a new state or dimensional value. Its a technicality for legal argument because the dimensional does not alter originality in the object data itself.

So if the volume of data in BVAS and EC8 is 10million, whether you transmit the BVAS info to server or not, whether you upload to irev or not, the 10million does not change. To validate the accuracy you go to source - BVAS and EC8.

All these fanciful jibberish about transmission and upload and Irev and server is bojuboju...na smokescreen.

What i presented in this flowchart gives clarity to those who know and have followed tribunal and petitions.

Once Yoruba person wants to lie and do their propaganda, they will bring in pie chart, bar chart, spiral graphs and flowchart to deceive gullible people..

See why your flowchart won’t work.

A lot of irregularities like this abound.

^^^^

You guys are not following tribunal. Just here to make noise and get likes.

An EC8 endorsed with signatures from present party agents is authentic, regardless of its tabulations.

Party agents were trained on how to endorse, how to dispute and how to record counts at their polling units.

If an irregularity is noticed, why did the LP party agent sign the form, why couldn he/she dispute the figures? And also take a snapshot with their smart phone?

Even if you didn't go to school, pretend like you did. Be logical in your post.

Cooly100:

Once Yoruba person wants to lie and do their propaganda, they will bring in pie chart, bar chart, spiral graphs and flowchart to deceive gullible people..

Because we know you are emotional, and can't process sequence and orders.

ImperialYoruba:
^^^^

You guys are not following tribunal. Just here to make noise and get likes.

An EC8 endorsed with signatures from present party agents is authentic, regardless of its tabulations.

Party agents were trained on how to endorse, how to dispute and how to record counts at their polling units.

If an irregularity is noticed, why did the LP party agent sign the form, why couldn he/she dispute the figures? And also take a snapshot with their smart phone?

Even if you didn't go to school, pretend like you did. Be logical in your post.

Shut up and allow the courts decide. No mandate thief will be president of any nation. If anyone wants to be president, let him win a free, fair and credible election.

A man who came distant 3rd wants to use Yoruba sense to become president, una try well well.

Tinubu would be thrown out in the coming months and the true winner of the election would reclaim his mandate and take Nigeria to greater height.

Next time, quote me, so I can reply you timely. Stop behaving like a typical Yoruba.

I believe you mistook my comment for being political.

No, I was admiring your process flow and only made a professional suggestion on how to improve it.

I was not being involved that much in the political talk.

ImperialYoruba:


Decision point is directly below the statement box, you are incorrect for calling it the starting point.

The flow is concerned with the contention over data, not candidate eligibility.

Irev is just a mirror of bvas. If the mirror failed to reflect the object, then go to the object and inspect if its data matches EC8.

Debating transmission, whether manual or electronic, is only technical. When you transmit something it means you changed its state and gave it a new state or dimensional value. Its a technicality for legal argument because the dimensional does not alter originality in the object data itself.

So if the volume of data in BVAS and EC8 is 10million, whether you transmit the BVAS info to server or not, whether you upload to irev or not, the 10million does not change. To validate the accuracy you go to source - BVAS and EC8.

All these fanciful jibberish about transmission and upload and Irev and server is bojuboju...na smokescreen.

What i presented in this flowchart gives clarity to those who know and have followed tribunal and petitions.

ojesymsym:
I believe you mistook my comment for being political.

No, I was admiring your process flow and only made a professional suggestion on how to improve it. Most BPM usually has to have an input before a decision point. To illustrate what I was trying to say, I have edited your diagram.

I was not being involved that much in the political talk.

Thanks for clarifying.

All individuals come to vote, those registered and those not registered. A decision of eligibility has to be a part of the process, it is a filter. So the decision point represent the fact.

Edited
However, BVAS accreditation is the beginning of the process. Accreditation is the filter, the human is the enforcer.

Say I walk in and gave pvc, they scan and Im not returned as a voter. BVAS has already filtered me out. But BVAS cannot stop me from casting ballot. The enforcer has to direct me away, and that is what that decision point does, visually.

Thanks.

I just looked at your diagram again and I can see your diagram is actually correct, it was me who was mistaken. Perhaps because you put the trigger point at the top and not on the left.
My apology

ImperialYoruba:


Thanks for clarifying.

All individuals come to vote, those registered and those not registered. A decision of eligibility has to be a part of the process, it is a filter. So the decision point represent the fact.

Edited
However, BVAS accreditation is the beginning of the process. Accreditation is the filter, the human is the enforcer.

Say I walk in and gave pvc, they scan and Im not returned as a voter. BVAS has already filtered me out. But BVAS cannot stop me from casting ballot. The enforcer has to direct me away, and that is what that decision point does, visually.

Thanks.

ojesymsym:
I just looked at your diagram again and I can see your diagram is actually correct, it was me who was mistaken. Perhaps because you put the trigger point at the top and not on the left.
My apology

Thanks.

I love using flow chart, it is very good for navigating and organizing complex sequences.

You sound like a professional Business Process Manager.