<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>[Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better Proposal</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=707045722-30092005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Regarding: </FONT>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Jeff wrote ...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>> [ Note: Voters will
execute almost the same ballot regardless of what<BR>> ranked voting method
we choose. -- JRF ]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><SPAN class=707045722-30092005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>I feel this is undoubtedly true. I think it is very important to keep the
idea of ranked ballots on the table, because us voters intuitively are good at
ranking things. Give me a ranked ballot and I can fill out, and allow me to help
figure out how to count ranked ballots as a SEPARATE issue. Just give me ranked
ballots and I can live through using a "wrong" method to count 'em for a few
election cycles.</FONT></SPAN></DIV></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B>
election-methods-electorama.com-bounces@electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces@electorama.com] <B>On Behalf
Of </B>Simmons, Forest <BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 30, 2005 5:48
PM<BR><B>To:</B>
election-methods-electorama.com@electorama.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [EM] FW:
[Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better
Proposal<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText27160 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Somehow this message didn't
pass muster for the Condorcet list.</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Simmons, Forest <BR><B>Sent:</B> Wed
9/28/2005 2:31 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Condorcet@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B>
RE: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better
Proposal<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText66944 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>Jeff wrote ...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>> [ Note: Voters will execute almost the same
ballot regardless of what<BR>> ranked voting method we choose. -- JRF
]<BR><BR>Forest replies: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>If voters are going to rank the candidates
without regard for the method, then there is no gratuitous
approval problem in the implicit approval version of
DMC.</DIV></FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>