[EM] Comments on Russ's MinMax posting
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
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:
> 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