[EM] Comments on Russ's MinMax posting

Russ Paielli 6049awj02 at sneakemail.com
Tue Jun 21 00:29:25 PDT 2005

MIKE OSSIPOFF nkklrp-at-hotmail.com |EMlist| wrote:
> First, a comment on what James said:
> On May 27, James wrote:
>     I argue that minimax makes no sense as a public election proposal.
> I comment:
> Actually James isn't arguing it; he's asserting it. To argue it, it 
> would be necessary to tell reasons to justify his assertion.

Actually, James *did* give several good reasons, both in the paragraph I 
quoted from him and more so in the post that I provided a link for. It's 
bad enough to ignore them, but Mike goes a step further and arrogantly 
assert that James didn't provide them. This is a classic example of why 
arguing with Mike is a complete and utter waste of time. After you strip 
away the personal insults, lies, and errors, all that remains is 
pedantic arrogance.

For reference, here is the link to James' post:


I can tolerate arrogance, and I can tolerate someone being wrong, but I 
have difficulty tolerating people who are arrogantly wrong.

> James continues:
> If
> we're going to try to implement pairwise count methods on a big scale,
> we should choose good ones.
> I comment:
> Now there's a new slant!

One that Mike would do well to heed!

I will not waste any more time replying to the rest of Mike's garbage.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list