[EM] Kevin, 2 March, ´'5, 1425 GMT

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Kevin said:

I think, in short, that the "situation" (of odds distribution)
is not relevant to FBC.

I reply:

Ok, now I know what Markus meant by "situation". He meant an outcome that is 
a lottery.


There are 2 answers to Markus´s question, depending on whether we call his 
lotteries the outcomes, or whether we call the single winner after the 
lotteries the outcomes. I prefer the latter definition of outcome.

If we define outcome in that latter way, then we don´t have to answer 
Markus´s question about which lottery the voter prefers to the other, 
because they aren´t outcomes, as I define outcomes.

I define an outcome as a single-winner. Markus´s lottery outcomes, are, by 
my definition, not outcomes, but only intermediate points in the method´s 
selection.
K
evin continued:

I think the quoted definition answers
the question this way: In neither situation 1 nor situation 2 (which
I assume to be obtained by voting differently) could the voter
obtain a "result" preferable to the best result in the other
situation.

I reply:

I probably would agree, though I´d have to take another look at Markus´s 
lotteries.

Kevin continued:

I have to interpret "result" to mean "the candidate who actually
got the seat,"

I reply:

Yes, that´s how I interpret that word´s meaning.

Kevin continued:

Pretending Mike agrees with my interpretation (and that he clarifies FBC
accordingly),

I reply:

I do agree with that interpretation of "outcome". An outcome is the 
candidate who is selected, after any lotteries, if the method includes 
lotteries, have been carried out.

We can call that a clarification of FBC, but I suggest that it´s also the 
presumptive default definition of "outcome". How can Markus say that there´s 
an outcome, when people are waiting to find out who will be president? The 
lottery clearly is not an outcome. The selection process clearly is not over 
till the lottery has given a winner. That´s when there´s an outcome. When it 
isn´t known who the president will be, there´s no outcome, by any reasonable 
definition of "outcome".

If a method chooses lotteries such as Markus described, and the method 
stipulates that the lotteries be carried out, to find the single winner, 
then clearly the lotteries are part of the method, and not the outcome of 
the method.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/