<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'>
<br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">From: nkklrp@hotmail.com<br>To: election-methods@electorama.com<br>Subject: Kristofer: MJ & RV<br>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 22:17:06 +0000<br><br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft SafeHTML">
<style>
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
</style>
<div dir="ltr">
Kristofer:<br><br>You say that MJ and RV are the methods to propose because they're the ones that meet the two criteria you defined.<br><br>Have you demonstrated that they're the only ones?<br><br>What about Approval? It's simpler. Simpler to define, implement and vote. And supplementable by the conditionality options that I've<br>described, to get rid of the co-operation/defection problem.<br><br>Your reply regarding MJ seemed basically to be saying that maybe you won't regret voting sincerely in MJ. That's great if you like "maybe".<br><br>When you say that some will rate sincerely, you're moving the topic to psychology. And I like the way you guys like to theorize about how people<br>would vote, while declining to find out what voting is like in the various proposed methods, via a poll.<br><br>But maybe you're right. Maybe in MJ some would rate sincerely and some would, instead, voting in their best interest.<br><br>Whether that is good or bad depends on whether the suckers are your co-factionalists or mine.<br><br>Mike Ossipoff<br> </div></div> </div></body>
</html>