[EM] Declaration wording refinement

[Richard Fobes]

How about a wording such as this:

"Unanimously we agree that all of these supported methods are 
significantly better than plurality voting, and we endorse using them in 
governmental elections."

This wording could replace the following sentence:

"Every person signing this declaration supports our call to end the use 
of plurality voting in governmental elections."

Thank you Kristofer Munsterhjelm and Dave Ketchum for expressing your 
desire to make the declaration stronger.

Richard Fobes


On 10/14/2011 8:57 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> Richard Fobes wrote:
>> To: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
>>
>> I believe that you imply, in your message copied below, that you like
>> the following words in the older version of the recently edited
>> paragraph (of the Declaration of Election-Method Reform Advocates):
>>
>> "... we would not hesitate to support any of these methods over
>> plurality voting"
>>
>> Unfortunately it is becoming clear that the words "support" and "any"
>> are problematic.
>
> I read "supporting these methods over plurality voting" as, that when
> given the choice between any of those methods and Plurality, we would
> (without hesitation) pick the method, whichever it was.
>
> I understand that exactly what constitutes a choice of one method vs
> Plurality might be fuzzy. As you mention, failing to support method X
> outright when you prefer Y might lead both X and Y to fail against
> Plurality. On the other hand, I still think we prefer all the methods
> mentioned in the declaration to Plurality itself, and if we could find
> some way of saying so beyond just "anything but Plurality", it would
> make the declaration stronger. It could serve to distinguish the methods
> of the declaration from, say, Borda, where some of us might say "okay,
> that's better than Plurality", and others may say "no, the teaming
> effect is too severe".
>
> If the declaration is meant primarily to be against Plurality, then the
> newer wording is probably best; but if it recommends methods when people
> ask with what one should replace Plurality, then distinguishing the
> methods we all like enough (approve in Approval terms? :-) ) from those
> that some of us do, is also useful.
>
> (I hope I didn't mangle my words too badly!)
>
>
>
>
>