Bruce: Procedural Question

[Mike Ossipoff]

We've so far been getting by with the very reasonable procedure of
carrying out actions that are moved & seconded, unless someone
objects. 

So: Bruce, was your letter merely the expression of opinion, which
could, optionally be the basis of a formal objection or counterproposal
by someone else--or do you intend your letter as the expression of
objection or opposition to the posting on ER of the report in
its current form? Do you want to force a vote on whether to
post the proposal with all of your suggested modifications
(there of course being 1 or more other alternatives)?

***

That question is the main purpose of this letter. But I might
as well bring up what we'd have to do if Bruce intends to force
a vote (my claim or opinion about what we'd have to do then):

There are several possible alternatives (which fortunately, so
far reduce to only 2, which makes for a simpler election):

1. Make all the modifications suggested by Bruce
2. Make none of the modifications suggested by Bruce, and
   post the report in its current form.
3. Make some part of the modifications suggested by Bruce,
   but not all of them.
4. Make other modifications, either by themselves, or
   combined with those suggested by Bruce.


Alternative #2, I hope we all agree, is out of the question, since
Bruce has the right to tell us not to call a method Regular Champion,
a name that he coined.

No alternative of type #4 has been proposed.

Only 1 alternative of type 3 has been proposed: My proposal
to post the report exactly as-is, except with the addition of
Tobin's definition of Smith//Condorcet(Tobin), and the changing
of the name "Regular Champion" to "Copeland//Plurality" wherever
that name occurs in the report.

If we have to vote, then, and no new proposals are made, then
there are just 2:

Mike's proposal & Bruce's proposal.

Having only 2 proposals, as I said, would greatly simplify a
vote, since there'd be no question about what voting system
to use.

***

But I emphasize that we don't yet know if we have to vote, and
that's why I asked Bruce the question that is the purpose of this
posting.

***

Mike


--