[EM] A problem?

[Michael Ossipoff]

I'd like comment more about this statement, because it it's typical of
Richard's pattern:

[quote]
Another concern is that some people following this forum will believe
all (or most) of what Michael says simply because currently he is so
prolific, and because he sounds like he understands election methods.
This problem has already manifested itself.
[endquote]

And what exactly is the problem?

That's a bit peculiar--this notion that it's a problem to Richard if
someone believes me.

It's understandably a problem if some particular thing said by me, and
believed by someone, is demonstrably incorrect.

But Richard is speaking in general, and without any justification
regarding his "problem".. His problem is just that someone might
believe me about something. Perhaps Richard needs to ask himself why
that's a problem to him.

[quote]
Someone on Wikipedia
requested that the Favorite Betrayal Criterion (FBC) -- that Michael
speaks of so lovingly -- should be moved from the last column to the
first column of the "comparison table" in the "Voting system" article --
because of its importance. Apparently the person has been believing what
Michael has been writing here and/or at Democracy Chronicles.
[endquote]

Yes, but when I argue a position, and someone else agrees, what makes
that a problem to Richard?

In other words, Richard's motivation is in question. His comments open
a question regarding his motivation. No, I don't want to get involved
in trying to guess his motivation or explain it in detail.

Now we're getting a bit more specific. Richard now could tell us why
he believes that my claim of FBC;s importance is incorrect. If he
could convincingly establish that, then he could speak of a problem,
when someone agrees with me.

But of course he doesn't do that. He says that it's a problem that
someone has believed what I said about FBC's importance, and, to
justify that claim, he would need to tell why he thinks that FBC
_isn't_ important, or find a fallacy or incorrect premise or
conclusion in my arguments about FBC's importance. Of course, true to
form, he doesn't do that.

Yes, Richard asserts that he believes that FBC's importance is in the
lower half. And evidently that's the best that he can do--an assertion
of personal opinion. So any statement that is contradicted by
Richard's personal unsupported opinion is a problem, if believed?

Michael Ossipoff