<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
Just as I did when I proposed the poll, I continue to proceed is if there will be interest and participation<br>in the poll. I should do so whether or not it later turns out that there is interest and participation.<br><br>There have only been 7 parties nominated (by me), with the Republicans and Democrats divided<br>into five subgroups. So, 7 parties or 10 parties and party-subgroups.<br><br>Though the Directory of U.S. Political Parties (if that's its accurate name), findable on the Internet,<br>lists a _lot_ of parties, the 7 that I nominated adequately cover the political spectrum in the U.S.<br><br>It turns out that it's advantageous to have so few "candidates" in this mock election, because people<br>on EM have suggested two additional ballotings: 3-slot, and IRV3/AV3.<br><br>That brings the number of ballotings to five:<br><br>1. Approval (where, optionally, voters can use any one of the other voting methods that I've offered)<br><br>2. Score Voting (Unless someone suggests otherwise, I suggest voting as you would in an actual<br>Score-Voting election, which may or may no be sincere). I suggest a range of 0-99.<br><br>3. 3-Slot Rankings (or ratings). No special balloting features. <br><br>4. Unlimited Rankings. No special balloting features.<br><br>5. IRV3/AV3<br><br>For every voting method of more than 2 slots, I suggest the availability of the AERLO option, because<br>it's useful in every such method, and therefore is not method-specific.<br><br>Though I wouldn't publicly propose AERLO until I'm sure it wouldn't spoil FBC compliance, I'm certain<br>that a highly improbable FBC violation wouldn't be a problem in EM voting. If I knew that AERLO<br>caused an FBC violation, I wouldn't suggest its use, even here. Since I don't know yet, I'll assume that<br>it doesn't have that problem and that it will qualify as a good public proposal. Any such unlikely FBC<br>problem that it might have wouldn't be a problem in an EM poll.<br><br>Anyway, with so many ballotings, it wouldn't do to have a lot of "candidates". Five ballotings are manageabe<br>and feasible when there are only 7 parties.<br><br>Still, of course anyone should feel free to nominate others. But be conscious of the need to keep the<br>candidate-number down, due to the relatively large number of ballotings (five).<br><br>The nominations deadline is January 15th, at 0 hours, 1 minute, GMT (UT).<br><br>And I repeat that you don't really know what you think of the methods, what it would be like to use them,<br>what problems they have, etc., until you actually do use them. That's why polling, fairly frequent polling,]<br>is absolutely essential at a mailing list that discusses voting systems. <br><br>Voting systems can't meaningfully or usefully be discussed without finding out what it's like to actually<br>use them.<br><br>To the person who feels "why should I go along with what _you_ say? Who appointed you?", I answer that,<br>if someone else had proposed a poll, that would have been fine with me. I waited a long time. So, then, why<br>accept my poll? How about because it's the only political mock election that has been proposed in the past few months. I don't<br>know how recent the most recent mock political election on EM is. We did one in 2004.<br><br>And note that I specifically and systematically want to avoid any dictatorialness regarding this poll.<br><br>I nominated 7 parties, but I don't claim exclusive right to nominate parties.<br><br>I suggested three ballotings, but I don't claim exclusive right to decide that either. Two people have suggested<br>additional ballotings. <br><br>My exclusive role in this poll pretty much ended with my proposing it. After that, I intend<br>for it to be a collective project, and I claim no exclusive or special right to decision-input.<br><br>Related to this poll, only one suggestion is exclusively my own: That there be a poll. Beyond that, I claim<br>no special input.<br><br>Yes, I intend to do a Voter's Choice count, if there is participation and if voters designate a method, but that,<br>too, isn't an exclusive right: Anyone can count any of the ballotings however they want to.<br><br>Some might be bothered by the fact that I've offered my conditional voting methods as options in the Approval<br>election. But note that they're _options_. Obviously, anyone else could suggest other options, and anyone<br>could use, or not use, any option. Likewise for the AERLO option.<br><br>Mike Ossipoff<br><br><br><br><br><br> </div></body>
</html>