[EM]

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

R.V. wrote:

>I, too, am a lay observer of this discussion, and would like to second 
>these
>questions, with an emphasis on the "understandable" part. I am one of those
>uneducated voters you speak of.
>--R.V., Student
>   East Lansing, MI

The important thing is not to take anyone's word about things.

On an issue like IRV vs Approval/Condorcet, ask yourself which
position is more fully-supported with convincing argument. Don't
be influenced by the fact that IRV is aggressively promoted by
an organization (CVD) whose officers have impressive organizational
titles, and which can afford to spend money on brochures and give
money to the League of Women Voters. And don't be impressed if the
LWV endorses IRV after receiving that money :-)

Does the lesser-of-2-evils problem matter to you? Majority rule?
If so, then my arguments in the just-posted 3-part reply should be
of interest to you. Likewise the criteria & arguments at the websites
that I cited.

Mike Ossipoff




>
>
>>From: "JanetRAnderson" <JanetRAnderson at email.msn.com>
>>Reply-To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
>>To: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
>>Subject: Re: [EM]
>>Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 08:47:02 -0700
>>
>>May I interrupt your discussion for a moment to ask a couple of questions?
>>
>>(I currently chair Washington Citizens for Proportional Representation and
>>I
>>believe this list began from our Web site.  I have been a silent member of
>>the list for the last couple of months, just to see what was going on.)
>>
>>I am disturbed by the negative references to CVD and the League of Women
>>Voters new national study.  I am trying to influence the content of the
>>latter.  Could you put in simple, layman's words (not formulas), what is 
>>so
>>bad about IRV for single winner offices?  Are you so adamant in your
>>opposition that you will actively and publicly oppose any tiny steps 
>>toward
>>Choice Voting that those of us working in the education trenches try to
>>make?
>>
>>I am a teacher and strong supporter of STV.  If there is something better,
>>that you can make understandable to me, and that I can help make
>>understandable to others, I'd like to hear about it on or off the list..
>>  Thank you.
>>JanetRAnderson at msn.com
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Craig Carey" <research at ijs.co.nz>
>>To: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
>>Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 11:02 PM
>>Subject: [EM] Papers are voters: asserting aspects of voters
>>
>>
>> > I ask subscribers to regard this as a puzzle that I haven't understood.
>> > Yet there seems to be little stated concern that the list is less than
>> > what subscribers might want or hope for.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.