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

[Bart Ingles]

Blake Cretney wrote:
> 
> "MIKE " <nkklrp at hotmail.com>, on the subject of 'Re: [EM] FWD -
> [instantrunoff] Houston column on IRV', is quoted as:
> 
> >Don Davison wrote:
> >
> >Folks,
> >
> >Although it's not exactly what I would have written, below is the
> published
> >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
> copyright.


I have no particular objection to the postings, so long as they are
authentic.  I may want to respond to some of them.  But since I'm
receiving copies from the ER list as well, maybe they could be posted to
either one list or the other.  Most of these materials could be
classified as information about reform campaigns, which I believe are in
keeping with ER's charter.

Bart