[EM] Introduction (cont.)

DEMOREP1 at aol.com DEMOREP1 at aol.com
Fri Aug 10 13:38:03 PDT 2001

In a message dated 8/10/01 12:51:55 PM, Mr. Johnson wrote:

<<Thanks for putting all the effort into bringing me up to speed. You
do make good arguments for the applicability of strategy, even when
the probabilities are poorly known.

The fact that strategy changes probability, which affects strategy is
a feedback loop and either it would be a good topic for a chaos
theorist, or I'm just dropping buzzwords. It reminds me of the story
of the judge who told the convict that he would be executed on or
before a particular date, but he wouldn't know when.

The convict reasoned that he couldn't do it on the given date,
because he would have to know, when that day arrived, that it was the
day. Then, having ruled out the final day, the same argument applied
to the day before. He thus ruled out all days, but was, in fact,
executed on a day he didn't expect it.

In my mind, the feedback loop should be similarly self-defeating. Of
course, it's possible that chaos theory isn't as neat and tidy as I
want it to be (or that it isn't even the right buzzword).>>

D- With polls existing there will NOT be any *zero-information* methods -- 
thus allowing ALL sorts of strategy machinations - whatever method is being 

Which came first the chicken or the egg (or as updated-- the strategy for an 
election method or the poll) ???

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list