Typo

[Mike Ositoff]

In my most recent posting, I said that it's optimal, with 
Saari's -100 to 100 system, to give -100 to everything that one
wouldn't vote for in Plurality. I meant, -100 to everything worse
than what one would vote for in Plurality. Obviously one would
give 100 to what one would vote for in Plurality, and to everything
one likes more.

Again, this is a simplification, which assumes that one has a
pretty good guess about what the needed compromise is. Without
that assumption, even Plurality requires a mathematical forumula,
based on your utilities, and on the probabililties of each possible
pair of alternatives being in a 2-way tie for 1st. More complicated
for Runoff. Much more complicated for IRO. Complicated or not, of
course, you still have to guess--you're just less likely to
do it right & successfully maximize your expectation.

Mike