[EM] Answers regarding claim about Approval's enact-ability

[Michael Ossipoff]

Jameson:

2012/4/13 Michael Ossipoff <mikeo2106 at msn.com>






Richard--

No one can fault you for being busy.

But, I would just humbly suggest that, if you're too busy to support a statement that you make,
it would be great if you could also be too busy to _make_ the statement.




You replied:

Might I humbly suggest that if you've been repeatedly asked by more than one list member to not use acronyms that aren't documented on the electorama wiki, and you've repeatedly put off these requests by saying you'll do it when you get around to it, that it would be great if you'd refrain from telling others what not to say

[endquote]

Yes you might suggest that, and, in fact, you just have. Whether the suggestion makes any sense is a whole other question.

You can reasonably suggest that I put my definitions at the electowiki, I've said that I will, and I indeed will. Sorry that I've taken so long, but, like Richard, we
can all be busy.

I'm going to also combine all my definitions into a single EM posting, whose subject-line will say something like "All or most of my definitions".

That would be much better than the electowiki, where anything that anyone posts can be deleted, replaced or modified.  Someone on EM
told me that you mis-defined a method at the electowiki. But I'll put my definitions at the electowiki, in addition to posting them here in one
posting.

But only you know how you think you can justify your suggestion that, if I haven't used the electowiki, then we should throw out or disregard
the EM guideline that members should be prepared to support their statements. I stand by my statement that people should support
their statements.

You continued:

, especially if doing so involves mis-characterizing terse support complete with apology as a lack of support?

[endquote]

Forgive me for contradicting you, but rather than terse support, Richard's post contained no support at all for
his claim that Approval is un-enactable for presidential general elections.   ...or for his presumable implication that
other methods, such as Condorcet or Kemeny are more enact-able than Approval for such elections.

As for "apology": Even better than apologizing would be to refrain to make statements that one is too busy
to support. EM guidelines, remember?

Mike Ossipoff












 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120413/b9dc5428/attachment-0004.htm>