[EM] More falsity: Concavity is what we want, better that than , a triangle

[Forest Simmons]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Craig Carey wrote:

> 
> Forest Simmons is sort of arguing for the rights of electorates but not
> for rights of voters.
> 

Actually I wasn't arguing for anybody's rights. I was more interested in
customer satisfaction.

Perhaps you read "partition" as "petition" , or it could be that some
words have different denotations or connotations on opposite sides of the
big pond.

Craig, I think that we could make more progress in our dialogue if you
would give us your definition of a voting system.

I wonder if your definition of voting method is general enough to include
all (or even most) of the systems we have been talking about on the EM
list. That could be the source of your obvious frustration.

If I had your definition (of voting method) in your language (formal or
not), I might be able to give a definition (to your satisfaction) of what
I consider a voting system to be in the same (or similar) language, so
that you could, for example, see how Buddha Buck's definition of Approval
fits into that general framework.

We're having trouble communicating, and we don't want to take a chance of
some good ideas being lost because of that :-)

Forest