[EM] Consdervation of information

[Richard Lung]

Yes, Kevin, an improvement on Borda, in that respect.

Regards,

Richard.


On 24/01/2023 07:46, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I'm not quite sure what you're saying below, but the Later-no-harm criterion is an argument *for* traditional STV, not against it.
>
> Kevin
>
> (end)
>
>
>
>   Le lundi 23 janvier 2023 à 14:51:20 UTC−6, Richard Lung <voting at ukscientists.com> a écrit :
>
> “The possibility of later harm,” alleged of parents, is an argument used by social services, in Britain, to excuse forced adoptions. It cannot be disproved. It is a superstition and persecution, incapable of scientific disproof, unworthy of a modern knowledge-based society. Likewise, a similar unproven and unprovable excuse against the use of STV, made, by a career party, in the Plant report, citing Riker, without demonstration, that stv is "chaotic."
>