SARC definition improvement

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

>Mr. Ossipoff wrote in part-
>
>The problem is when all that a certain majority agrees on is that
>there's someone whom they don't want to elect
>
>---
>D- Not a problem.  The majority can just vote NO on folks that they do not
>want to elect (in the same manner that a majority can just vote NO on 
>ballot
>proposals that they do not want to be enacted into law).

But it's still a problem. Adding the Y/N vote to the balloting
merely complicates the strategy--it doesn't get rid of the
need for defensive strategy. If you're a progressive, you could
vote No for Al Gore, but if you're a lesser-of-2-evils progressive,
you'll feel a need to vote "Yes" for him, believing that he's the
only thing keeping Bush from winning. Nothing is solved by adding
Y/N, then. But Y/N greatly complicates the strategy of voting systems.
For instance Approval with Y/N (by which we choose among
mutually-contradictory initiatives in California now) has a much
more complicated strategy thatn ordinary plain Approval.

Maybe Gore is unacceptable to you, but many (not including me)
will say that Bush is more unacceptable, so we should elect the
lesser-of-2-unacceptables, and give Gore an insincere "Yes" vote,
while holding our nose. Surely you've heard things like that.
Yes it would be nice if everyone voted sincerely, but they don't,
and they won't start when we add Y/N voting. In fact, Y/N would
force insincere voting & strategy dilemma even if we had the
best rank-balloting method.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________________
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.