<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">What I see:<div>. Condorcet - without mixing in Approval.</div><div>. SODA - for trying, but seems too complex.</div><div>. Reject Approval - too weak to compete.</div><div><br></div><div>Dave Ketchum</div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 8, 2011, at 6:56 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>First, I'd ask people on this list to please stop discussing tax policy here. It's not the place for it.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> (What happened to that idea of finding a compromise method that everybody on EM could support? Did the idea get sidetracked by SODA?)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>More or less. My impression was that we had agreed that a statement should explain and support no more than two simple methods, and mention as good a broad range - as many as could get broad acceptance. For the simple methods, it seemed that people were leaning towards (Condorcet//Approval or Minimax/WV) plus (Approval or SODA). For the "generally agreed as improvements", I think we could get consensus that the aforementioned ones plus MJ, Range, and a catch-all "condorcet methods" (since in practice they are unlikely to differ), would all be improvements over plurality.</div> <div><br></div><div>So, I guess the question is: is there anyone who would support Approval but not SODA? Respond in text. Also, I made a poll on betterpolls - go vote. <a href="http://betterpolls.com/v/1425">http://betterpolls.com/v/1425</a></div> </div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>