[EM] IRV vs. Plurality

[Dave Ketchum]

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 18:06:33 -0400 John B. Hodges wrote in part:

> 
> Bart also said he didn't accept the "stepping-stone" argument. Again 
> IMHO, there is very little worth to ANY single-winner method, unless it 
> is part of a larger agenda for proportional representation. In abstract 
> models you can argue that the legislature will choose the same proposals 
> under single-seat districts as it would under PR, if the single-seat 
> districts choose their reps by some good single-winner method. IMHO this 
> is losing sight of the differences between abstract models and reality. 
> Theorists and professional academics sometimes do this, it is a failing 
> to guard against. Reality is discontinuous, nonlinear, multidimensional, 
> and "messy" in many ways; having mathematical assurances of equilibrium 
> tendencies of abstract systems is no substitute for having a real human 
> being in the legislature whom you voted FOR as articulating your own 
> views and priorities. To seriously reform the current system, we need to 
> move to a multiparty system; to allow a larger fraction of the 
> population to see someone in the legislature who they voted FOR, who 
> represents their views, there is no alternative (AFAIK) to proportional 
> representation in multi-seat districts. Single-winner methods are 
> sometimes unavoidable; for executive seats, we might as well use the 
> best method we know of. There is no good in using single-seat methods 
> when they are not necessary.


What, useful, did this long paragraph contribute?


Topic of the thread is a couple varieties of single-winner methods.

Then, trying to decipher what you said, there is VERY LITTLE:
      You do not like single-winner - your privilege but, evenso, this is 
off topic for this thread.
      You, RELUCTANTLY, concede that single-winner is appropriate for 
executive seats.
      Since that is NOT all it is good for in the US, you demonstrate, at 
a minimum, not understanding how this country is put together.

Since you dislike single-winner, why do you not:
      Leave it to those of us who see the need and are working at it?
      Work at PR - toward the better possible methods and the advantages 
of each?  When I could make districts of 5 or 25 seats, what are the 
advantages of leaning toward few or many?



-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.