With all due respect, affidavits aren't evidence, they are a sworn statement of opinion.
My understanding is that they may [[or may not) be evidence depending on the use. You have a point, but it wasn't my main point.

People, some of whom are putting their employment at risk, were willing to write a sworn statement.

The judge's comments were that 'SOME' of the affidavits weren't up to snuff and showed lack of full understanding.

And in the end he's ruled against the argument. Probably the right decision.

That doesn't mean that all the poll-watchers are fools and idiots, nor that they are all uninformed.

Proving a solid process from start to finish is, IMO, the responsibility of the city clerk, and I've yet to hear an argument of quality -- only arguments of bad intentions from the challengers.

In the end, I hope this focus on how this unusual pandemic vote went leads to a more audible and transparent voting process for the future.