[EM] why 0-99 in range voting

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 02:59 PM 11/22/2006, Juho wrote:
>Wouldn't it be quite safe to e.g. arrange a Range poll/election and
>then declare the winner if there is a winner that is at the same time
>a Range winner, a Condorcet criterion winner and an IRV winner?

Yes. But what do you do if these do not coincide? Indeed, I've 
suggested using Range in this way, with a ratification or runoff if 
there is no coincidence of winners.

>  If
>all these three criteria are met, maybe nobody would complain, and
>there would be no need to use strategic votes in the initial Range
>poll/election. If some of the conditions are not met, then the Range
>poll/election would be called just a poll, no winner would be
>declared, and further discussions/voting would be needed.

That's deliberative process. With deliberative process, there is no 
artificial deadline for coming to a decision. Outer circumstances may 
create pressure, but the majority should be competent to determine 
whether or not it is more important to get a fast result or a deeply 
satisfying result....