<html><head></head><body>MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:F107DabigPasSmz6UuE00001a7e@hotmail.com">But when I talk to people about voting, they, believe it or not,
<br>
don't object to Plurality because distances from lines drawn on a
<br>
diagram aren't what they should be. No, what they say is that
<br>
people who prefer Nader should vote for Gore instead, because that's the
<br>
only way of making Bush lose.
</blockquote>
Yes that's true, but I'm not in the marketing department...<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:F107DabigPasSmz6UuE00001a7e@hotmail.com">You seem to regard this as some sort of mathematical game or art form
<br>
that should be above such mundane considerations as the concerns of
<br>
voters and the political and material consequences of the voting system.
</blockquote>
Art form? No, I don't see it that way. Game? No. Mathematical?<br>
Definitely. But so many of the discussions on this list are either mathematical<br>
in nature or have a mathematical background. Why pick on this particular<br>
post all of a sudden? If you don't think it's important, you've already said so.<br>
That should suffice. My objection was that you said so in a way that<br>
completely mischaracterized what I had said. You said, "Richard has written<br>
about how one thing he likes about margins is that it looks nice on a certain<br>
diagram."<br>
<br>
My post was merely my late contribution to an already arcane discussion<br>
about scoring methods for Condorcet completion schemes. Talk about<br>
grabbing the public's attention. Are you saying such discussions don't have<br>
a place on this list because they aren't flashy enough for public<br>
consumption? It was a discussion I didn't have much interest in<br>
at the time it came up. Later when the EM poll forced me to start thinking<br>
about the topic I posted the answer I came up with, an answer as satisfying<br>
to me as your justification of winning votes is to you.<br>
<br>
Finally, in case you're wondering, I do have an interest in social aspects of<br>
the systems we discuss, though you don't seem to realize it. If there were<br>
no social or political consequences I wouldn't be writing here in the first<br>
place. Do you think that about me because I refrain from discussing<br>
political ideologies?<br>
<br>
Richard<br>
<br>
</body></html>