[EM] Why Robert's Rules is relevant to this list

[RLSuter at aol.com]

Abd ulRahman Lomax writes:

> In my opinion, however, Robert's Rules is only of
> peripheral interest on this list.

The discussion during the past week has strengthened my
view of the relevance of Robert's Rules for this list. To anyone
who has become minimally well-informed about alternative
methods for conducting votes when there are three or
more candidates or options and who looks at Robert's
Rules to see how such votes are dealt with, it is impossible
to notice that they are not encouraged and that suggested
methods for handling such votes if they must be conducted
are far from adequate in light of current knowledge about
voting methods. I find it nearly impossible to imagine that
if such knowledge had been available 130 years ago when
Henry M. Robert wrote the first edition of Robert's Rules,
he would not have had much more to say about it. As
a West Point graduate and an engineer, he certainly
would have had no trouble acquiring such knowledge if
it had been available to him.

I also find it nearly impossible to imagine that a committee
of parliamentarians who are well informed about alternative
voting methods would not want to recommend that they be
discussed more fully and adequately in future editions of
Robert's Rules. The trouble is that the percentage of
parliamentarians who are well informed about voting
methods is almost certainly extremely small, probably
less than 1%. I don't mean that as a put down, just an
unfortunate reality. If I had the money to start a foundation
dedicated to educate the public about voting methods,
among the first groups I would target, in addition to
high school civics teachers and college political science
instructors, would be parliamentarians.

-Ralph Suter