Are you unaware or unashamed?

[Mike Ossipoff]

donald at mich.com writes:
> 
> Dear List,
> 
>      On Tue 19 Now 1996 the following appeared in one of Steve's many messages.
> 
> Donald:>> Is not head to head pairing the same as Condorcet? I am confused.
> 
> Steve: > You'll find that Condorcet's method is a pairwise method.
> 
> Donald: Yes - I know Steve - I was being coy - I see now that coy will not do.


I thought that was made clear to you some time ago. We're tired of
what you call "coyness" or "humor".
 
> Donald: A picture was developing - a picture that carried a message. That
> message was that Condorcet means were being used to prove a claim of the
> Condorcet people. I was holding back - waiting to see if any of you
> Condorcet persons would see the conflict of interest in using Condorcet to
> prove Condorcet's validity - it was not to be - the message went over
> everyone's head. You Condorcet followers are either unaware or unashamed of
> this obvious conflict.

So this ass is still making that claim. It's already been pointed
out to him that we've been talking about standards, principles
& criteria, and not justifying a method according to its own rule.

I admit that, at first, I didn't know what the hell Don was talking
about, when he was being "coy". Later I realized that, incredibyly,
he was still repeating his "Condorcet-to-justify-Condorcet" claim,
as if he hadn't read any of the replies to his previous posting
of that claim. 

Rob, when someone admits that they're habitually being "coy"
or "humerous" instead of respecting the rest of us enough
to speak seriously or not at all, and when he both admits
& demonstrates that he hasn't read the messages that he's
replying to, and he keeps repeating the same statement without
replying to the refutations that the statement has received, isn't
there a time when it's decided that that person is only
a nuisance, and not a serious or genuine participant? And
isn't that the time to remove that person from the mailing
list?

> 
> Donald: I find this amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> .-
> 


--