[EM] Voting reform statement; a clearer and more inspiring, version

[Jameson Quinn]

2011/8/24 Markus Schulze <markus.schulze at alumni.tu-berlin.de>

> Hallo,
>
> I wrote (24 Aug 2011):
>
>
> > In my opinion, the "Voting Reform Statement"
> > endorses too many alternative election methods.
> > Opponents will argue that this long list
> > demonstrates that even we don't have a clue
> > which election method should be adopted.
>
> Jameson Quinn wrote (24 Aug 2011):
>
>
> > Is that worse than what happens if we can't
> > agree?
>
> Well, one of the most frequently used arguments
> against Condorcet methods is that there are too
> many Condorcet methods and that there is no
> agreement on the best one.
>

Yes. And will not agreeing on a consensus statement help that situation?

What I'm saying is: yes, it would be ideal if we could reduce the list and
all unite behind one system. But  we as voting theorists should be able to
find a way to keep this apparently-unattainable ideal from getting in the
way of whatever agreement is actually possible.

JQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20110824/593af532/attachment-0004.htm>