[EM] The list's complete rejection of the poll
Michael Ossipoff
mikeo2106 at msn.com
Tue Feb 20 07:59:41 PST 2007
It calls for a little comment. A number of times before, I've proposed
polls, and usually a number of people voted. Enough to do a meaningful,
interesting count. This is the first one in which not even one person (other
than myself) voted.
Obviously that's always a possibility. It was a possibility with each one of
the previous polls I conducted here. That never stopped me from proposing
those polls, just as it didn't prevent me from proposing the current one.
Likewise, one wouldn't offer any methods or criteria if one worried about
"what if it isn't popular, or isn't accepted at all?" wv Condorcet was a
proposal of mine that caught on pretty well. So did FBC. My other criteria
got a little favorable attention. Steve Eppley proposed some related (but
different) ones, and mentioned my (but not favorably). There was a little
interest in the majority defensive strategy criteria, but fashon moves on,
and I accept that, and it doesn't matter. I wanted to propose those criteria
because _I_ think they're important. That's all the reason I need to propose
something.
Same with polls. I've said that you don't know how you feel about the
methods, and you don't understand the methods, till you vote with them and
count them. I stand by that statement. There should be a presidential EM
poll. There is one. That's good enough.
I've told a number of advantages of my poll over the usual Internet
automated polls. Another advantage that I haven't mentioned yet is that,
with list-posted ballots, you can obsereve the votes coming in, and can
count them yourself--you can participate in a way that is impossible with an
automated Internet poll.
Anyway, the list's complete rejection of the poll called for comment, so
that's my comment.
Mike Ossipoff
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list