We Will Reveal No Preference Before Its Time

[New Democracy]

Dear members,

Hugh Tobin wrote:
      It is not a matter of transferring votes, just a rule that if A
is ranked higher than B on a ballot, then A gets one vote against B.

Don writes:
     You are on thin ice Hugh - you are saying "by defination" it is not a
matter of transferring votes.

     But the point is minor - the major problem with Condorcet is the same
- voters are being asked to give support to lower preferences when their
number one preference is still a contender - people will not like to do
this - enough will rebel to render Condorcet moot.

     I am thinking that I will adopt a battle cry:

         "Secret Ballots - Secret Preferences"

     If you believe in the secret ballot then maybe you should also believe
in the secret lower preferences. This can be done by the computer software
- the program can be written so that it will not reveal lower preferences
until the first preference candidate is no longer a contender.

         "We Will Reveal No Preference Before Its Time"

     Now I have a second battle cry.

Don,

Donald Eric Davison of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -