IRO, monotonicity

[David Catchpole]

On Sun, 1 Nov 1998, Mike Ositoff wrote:

> > 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'
> 
> It wouldn't be open discussion then. Open discussion is the
> advantage that these lists have over the academic journals

Open discussion could still occur on the list- but there would be huge
advantage to having an organised source of information and discussion
about voting systems, member's interests and current arguments, that would
augment the current "list system" (outrageously stupid electoral systems
pun).

> > objectivity or scientific nous; I'm just finding it very difficult to
> > handle what are often discontinuous arguments and it would be appreciated
> 
> My arguments have been discontinuous because my shell-account
> e-mail is, on some evenings, repeatedly & often disrupted by
> line-noise, making it necessary, on those evenings, to keep
> my messages very short, because otherwise I won't finish
> before the noise freezes the keyboard.

I'm cool with Mike's short messages- it's just that the current format for
debate on the list is as such- #1:"Blah?" #2:"Blah!" #1:"Blah.Blah!Blah!!"
#3: "BLAH!!!" It would help if we went into more detail than we thought
was necessary to intimidate the other side.

> 
> > if there was some extensive and well-argued investigation of each members'
> > interests and research. The "election-methods-journal" might be a group
> 
> Of course it's a good thing if people presenting arguments or
> making claims or proposals explain their interests & goals.
> 
> Research, I don't know. This isn't science. My conversations with
> other voters are research, and it has led me to want to get
> rid of the LO2E problem that all progressives are dominated
> & driven by. That's my interest in single-winner reform.

It is science, and we have to take a very scientific approach to many of
its aspects. Even if it doesn't define itself as "science" in the
stamp-collecting science manner, we still have to take a civil approach,
and a productive one.