[EM] truth

[Michael Garman]

>> But, while keeping my membership, I won’t be visiting this forum, where
the loud frequent posers can hardly be considered worth listening to. I’ll
look-up how to turn off posting-announcements.

What a shame.
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 8:14 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 07:10 Michael Garman <
> michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>
> That’s simply not true. It’s a matter of what you choose to value, and
>> it’s not your place to tell other people what they ought to value.
>>
>
> As Huxley said, thank you for proving that there’s no such thing as
> in-utterable nonsense.
>
> I asked  EM a question. The participation suggested willingness to answer
> it. I proposed a poll on a particular question. They have a
> freedom-of-speech right to refuse to answer my question & make a different
> poll with a different topic.
>
> What anyone values is their business, but yes, I can tell them that if
> they change the topic & purpose of the poll, then they cancel the poll that
> this was.
>
> They “ought to” do whatever they want, including canceling the poll that
> people presumably weren’t participating in, if they so choose.
>
> Michael G. had already demonstrated a lot about himself with his
> hilariously contorted effort to defend FairVote’s well-known & widely
> recognized falsehoods.
>
> Alright :-) I’ve run out of patience. This waste of time could go on
> forever. When I proposed this (or is it now “that”?) poll, I had no idea
> how hard it was going to be to get an answer to the poll’s question, or for
> (at least the loudest) people here to make any progress on a project.
> I was hoping for an answer before the November election, hbut that now
> looks unlikely.
>
> Optimistically assuming that it might be possible, it would take much too
> long…be much too time-consuming.
>
> Change the poll to whatever you want, or maybe don’t d.
>
> I don’t have time for this.
>
> The other thing is that it’s now evident that if I, when quoting the
> poll’s results (if we pretend that there would be any before November),
> claimed that the current EM members (collectively) are people whose
> recommendations are valuable & should be listened-to, then I’d be a liar.
>
> Joe was right: This has been a pure farce.
>
> Go for it, I guess…or not.
>
> …& no, I’m not quitting EM, but only because its sometimes read by people
> who write papers in academic journals, where a few of my proposals here
> have been announced.
>
> … making it a good place to post proposals. I…just in case I again post a
> proposal.
>
> But, while keeping my membership, I won’t be visiting this forum, where
> the loud frequent posers can hardly be considered worth listening to. I’ll
> look-up how to turn off posting-announcements.
>
>
> Your conceit is as astonishing as your decision to put a period at the end
>> of your signature is confusing.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 4:08 PM Richard Lung <voting at ukscientists.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Pleased don't tell me what I am implyng by the word "truth". There is
>>> such a thing as right and wrong, even in voting methods.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Richard Lung.
>>>
>>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
>> info
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240413/9ae3dd6b/attachment.htm>