[EM] James, reply to strategy reply (not to your original Mike: Strategy posting)

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

James--

You say:

I'm not an imbecile, and if you can't recognize that
fact...

I reply:

But you could start doing your part to make it easier to  recognize that 
fact. So far you often haven't been doing a very good job.

But you have a very good point when you say that our voting system is not 
something to get adventurous with, when there's any risk of in any way 
making it worse.

The fact that all rank methods are going to be worse than Plurality in some 
ways suggests that it would be very premature to propose a rank method, 
without some serious longterm studies.
But will that be enough?

How can you, a rank-method advocate, using theoretical arguments, assure us 
that your method's Participation and Consistency failures won't cause a bad 
problem? Are we to risk a possibly worse method just on your assurance? Do 
you think that anything short of longterm successful use can assure people 
that rank methods' failures won't be serious?

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/