[EM] ignoring "strength of opinion"

[James Gilmour]

> rob brown  Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 6:07 PM
> On 12/6/05, James Gilmour <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> This is the issue to which there has been no answer from 
>> those who suggested it.  There is no problem with fixed scale 
>> range voting (because the fixed scale 'normalises' the 
>> contribution of every voter), but that is not what was 
>> proposed to maximise the social utility. 
> 
> Now I'm a little confused.  I had always understood the 
> ballots to be on a fixed scale, say 1 to 10.  I also figured 
> it was fair to assume that all voters would give their 
> favorite candidates a 10 and least favorite a 1. 

Rob, if there is any confusion it is in the original "maximises social utility" posts.  The words in those messages did
NOT make it clear or even suggest that the ranges should be recorded on a fixed scale - quite the contrary.  That's what
started this present discussion.  With a fixed scale, there is no issue.

James Gilmour