[Oatka]

We found page after page showing the date not fully written out. . . . On other pages the date was abbreviated on every line, which according to Magney would be an error and could disqualify those signatures. So we contacted Magney once again for clarification--asking if what we found would be considered an error.
"Possibly, we'll have to see. But it has to be the full year spelled out," reiterated Magney by phone.

How can it only be "possible" and then turn in the same breath say that the date "has to be" - typical tap dancing by these people.

On some of the pages I worked on, the date was just "11". And . . . you have to wonder at the million + signatures. I saw some pages with only five signatures and one that had a single entry. I half suspect, as a previous poster suggested, that the anti-Walker people figured 10 signatures to a page by x amount of pages turned in and voila! over a "million" signatures.

[Oatka]

Well, that was short. The article has been corrected GAB: 2-digit dates OK