[EM] Condorcet Criterion for plurality.

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Markus said:

>You wrote (11 Dec 2000):
> > Anything can be defined as anything, but defining Plurality
> > on preferential ballots doesn't make it the same Plurality as
> > is used in the U.S. and U.K.  To use two different meanings of
> > the same term interchangeably is a logical fallacy (equivocation).
>
>Please explain!

It's true, Markus: You can define Plurality any way you want to,
but don't expect it to be the same thing, when you define it
in some odd way. Explain? Different definition with different
way of voting means different voting system. As someone pointed out,
the balloting is a component of a voting system. That's why we
call it a voting system. A voting system consists of a balloting
system and a count rule for the ballots. A balloting system is
a set of rules that tell what a voter may express on the ballot and
how he may express it. Let's not quibble about the order of the
candidates names, or the size & color of the ballot. Your assumed
balloting differs from Plurality balloting in a much more obviously
fundamental way.

Mike Ossipoff

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com