s349436 at student.uq.edu.au
Sun Nov 1 19:12:32 PST 1998
> I hadn't noticed the other passages, so thanks for pointing them
> out. I notice that, in the last one he says that
> _if manipulabililty is the prime concern_ then IRO is better.
> That's a big "if".
> The reason why Nurmi's manipulability hierarch is garbage
> is because the academic authors seem to be idiots on that
> subject. Continued in subsequent message.
Ouch. Do you think there would be more of an advantage to this list if we
had some journal-style arm which would incorporate whole articles and be
committee-mediated? I'm not casting aspersions upon current postings'
objectivity or scientific nous; I'm just finding it very difficult to
handle what are often discontinuous arguments and it would be appreciated
if there was some extensive and well-argued investigation of each members'
interests and research. The "election-methods-journal" might be a group
mediated message board somewhere, or even on "e-groups."
It might get the Mike's deluded little "academic authors" to pay
More information about the Election-Methods