[EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines

[Dave Ketchum]

On  Sat, 4 Oct 2008 23:59:51 +0100 James Gilmour wrote:
> Dave Ketchum > Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 7:37 PM
> 
>>Plurality does fine with two candidates, or with one obvious 
>>winner over others.
> 
> 
> I am horrified to read this statement on this list.  It is completely and utterly untrue.  Plurality fails on almost every count
> even when there are only two candidates in each electoral district and even when only two parties contest the elections.
> 
We have to be doing different topics.

PROVIDED there are only two candidates, all there is to do is pick one - 
and many methods can manage this with about equal effort.

I promote Condorcet BECAUSE I like what it does with more candidates.

Other methods have value in their environments.

....
> 
> No, plurality is a rotten voting system and it is a pernicious myth that it works OK when there are only two parties or only two
> contesting candidates in each electoral district.  We British who spread this appalling voting system around the world owe the
> electors of many countries an almighty apology for this dreadful legacy!!
> 
> James
-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.