[EM] FWD - [instantrunoff] Houston column on IRV

Blake Cretney bcretney at postmark.net
Sat Nov 25 17:47:43 PST 2000

"MIKE " <nkklrp at hotmail.com>, on the subject of 'Re: [EM] FWD -
[instantrunoff] Houston column on IRV', is quoted as:

>Don Davison wrote:
>Although it's not exactly what I would have written, below is the
>op-ed piece on IRV which appeared in the Houston Chronicle.
>I reply:
>For a long time you've been doing this, and I haven't been saying
>anything about that practice. As you know, and as I'm sure Rob L.
>will verify, this mailing list has a ground rule that says that we
>shouldn't keep repeating refuted arguments without answering the
>refuting replies. Check the website that states the list's charter.

I agree with Mike.  It isn't so much that the arguments are old and
refuted, it is the excessive use of forwarded material.  I'm not against
people making reference to letters posted elsewhere, and even copying
excerpts, when this doesn't violate copyright.  But every post to EM
should primarily be original to its poster.  Second, EM is a forum for
discussing the comparative merits of election methods.  It is not the
proper forum for giving details of the campaigns to get any particular
method adopted.  Of course a little of this is fine, but forwarding CVD
newsletters is way over the line.  If I wanted to receive CVD
newsletters, I would subscribe.  If I did subscribe, I would not want to
receive the same letter twice. 

Also, posting pieces from a newspaper is likely a violation of

Blake Cretney

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list