[EM] Criteria for signing upcoming declaration

[Richard Fobes]

On 8/25/2011 11:29 AM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
 > ...
 > As this is an "expert opinion", it is important that almost all experts
 > agree, otherwise it is not an expert opinion.
 > ...
 > Then the other question is who is an expert.
 > Someone who has published at least one paper in a peer-reviewed journal.
 > ...

In my opinion it would be too restrictive to require that signers of our 
upcoming "Declaration of Election-Method Experts" (or whatever it's 
called) must have written voting-method content for academic journals, 
Wikipedia, or other "peer-reviewed" publications.

Specifically I think that all the participants here and on other 
voting-method forums also should be allowed to sign. Additionally there 
are other election-method experts who do not have a dominant online 
presence, and who may not have published in an academic publication.

I think that ultimately what's important is that each person's 
credentials or affiliation as indicated in their signature should be 
recognized as relevant. For example, if someone has a graduate degree in 
mathematics, political science, or economics, their signature would be a 
helpful endorsement of what we are promoting, and it shouldn't matter 
that they haven't published material about voting methods (provided they 
do understand election methods).

More specifically, I would argue that Peter Zbornik is an 
election-method expert. His questions and comments here clearly indicate 
his expertise even though his involvement is not based in the academic 
world.

I would argue that real-world experience in using voting methods and 
analyzing election data is just as important as reading or writing 
academic journal articles about voting methods. More specifically, 
although Rob Ritchie of FairVote (not to be confused with VoteFair) 
"only" has a degree in philosophy and may not have written what others 
might regard as peer-reviewed articles, his experience with voting 
methods certainly qualifies him as an election-method expert. (Whether 
he would want to sign is a separate matter.)

Of course it's essential for any signer to understand the terminology 
used in election-method discussions. Beyond that, let's not get too 
biased in favor of the academic world and neglect the worlds of 
government, business, and "real life" where experience in using voting 
methods also can lead to election-method expertise.

That's my opinion. What do others think?

Richard Fobes