[EM] Express any wish for democratic choice of poll-parameters. Do-able if desired.

[Michael Ossipoff]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 12:05 Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
wrote:

> On 2024-04-10 20:56, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 02:54 Kristofer Munsterhjelm
> > <km_elmet at t-online.de <mailto:km_elmet at t-online.de>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>    I don't think it's
> >>    necessary to complicate matters by having a vote about what voting
> >>    method to use, or by inventing a meta-voting method.
> >
> >>    In short, let's keep it simple!
> >
> >
> > Oh we wouldn’t want to complicate it by naming a count-method for
> > counting it.
>
> Given that I said "voting", not "naming", and given that we've both
> already named some voting methods that could be used, what is your point?


I offered Schulze as a suggestion, an optional default. After a few (3, by
my count) people expressed preference for it, I asked if people wanted to
democratically choose a different choice-method.

There was no response, indicating that they were satisfied with the
optional default suggestion.

That’s fine with me, because, as I said, Schulze has (it seems to me from
what I’ve heard) has long been the favorite Condorcet method among
Condorcetists, including at EM, at least in past years.

It’s because of so many different nominations, that I wanted to clearly
suggest a democratic choice…if people wanted one.

Acceptance of the offered optional default is a good reason to not make a
democratic choice.

Sure, there’s nothing wrong with that. No objection from me.

I’m sorry if I misunderstood or misinterpreted you.






>
> -km
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240410/8209d5b8/attachment.htm>