[EM] Markus's latest

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Markus wrote:

Please check the definitions

I reply:

Why? You've already re-posted it, and so now I don't have to
find it in the archives.

Markus continues:

and stop spaming the EM archives with
lengthly mails in which you only write that you haven't checked the
definitions!

I reply:

Actually lately I've only been commenting on postings like the
one I'm replying to now. It was a long time ago that I said I
hadn't checked your definition, so why are you still talking about
that?

Markus continues:

I want you to remember that you asked me for an example
of a method that meets IIAC. Therefore, it can hardly be called
"offensive" "blather" or "idiotic crap" when I post Random Candidate
as an example and ask you to inspect this example.

I reply:

Correct. Your posting of the information that I asked for wasn't
"offensive", "blather", or "idiotic crap". But the letter that I
was replying to when I said those things was "offensive", "blather",
and "idiotic crap". As is the letter that I'm replying to now.

Markus continues:

Why is it impossible
for you to appreciate the fact that Random Candidate meets IIAC?

I reply:

I never said that Random Candidate doesn't meete IIAC. I said that
Random Candidate isn't a voting system.

But, contrary to your claim, Random Ballot doesn't meet IIAC, as
you define that criterion.

Mike Ossipoff


Markus Schulze





_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.