[EM] It's just that IRV isn't a significant reform

[Eric Gorr]

Chris Benham wrote:
>> Critics of IRV haven't said that IRV is evil. We've only said that IRV 
>> isn't a significant reform or a significant improvement over Plurality.
> 
> 
> The part after "We've only said that.." logically implies that either:
> 
> (1) "IRV  is  evil" , or
> 
> (2) "Plurality isn't evil, or is only slightly evil".
 >
> Let's just say that I was paraphrasing the clearly implied message.

One can certainly say that, but it will never make the statement truthful.