[EM] The wiki questionaire
stepjak at yahoo.fr
Tue Jun 14 21:23:10 PDT 2005
--- MIKE OSSIPOFF <nkklrp at hotmail.com> a écrit :
> I notice that Jobst, Kevin, and someone whose initials I didn't recognize,
> strongly disagree with having AERLO as an option.
> To those 3 people, I say: The nice thing about an option is that it's
> optional. You don't have to use it. Why would you strongly object to someone
> else having that option?
> Sure, of course you're strongly opposed to being free of need to do other
> than rank sincerely. But is it so bad if someone else has the option of
> choosing that?
My interpretation of that item is, "Do you think election methods should have
strategy options, like AERLO?" All other things being equal, I say no, certainly
not: It would be better not to have to implement such options. (My opinion about
approval cutoffs on ranked ballots is the same.)
Possibly the "best" method, with the "best" combination of properties, requires
a strategy option like AERLO. In that case I won't complain. But I don't think
it is the case, and if it is the case, I'll be disappointed.
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com
More information about the Election-Methods