<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'>
<pre>
Question 1. Your name and the city and country you work in.<br><br>I answer: Miami, Florida, U.S. (originally California)<br><br> Question 2. What is your Company or Organization?<br><br>I answer: No company or organization, though I've been a regular <br>participant at the Election Methods mailing list, at electowiki.<br><br>Question 3. Any contact info you wish to give to be published with
article for readers (for example your email or website.)<br><br>I answer postings at the elecion-methods mailing list. The mailing list<br>probably makes its participants' e-mail addresses available.<br><br> Question 4. If you have signed the Declaration, is there any additional
information, beyond what's in your signature, that you feel is important
to mention?
Question 5. If you have not signed the Declaration, why?<br><br>My answer to questions 4 and 5:<br><br>The only reason why I haven't yet signed the declaration is because I'd<br>assumed that it was only for celebrities, dignitaries, academic authorities<br>or other officially recognized authorities.<br><br>If anyone can sign the declaration, then I intend to sign it as soon as possible.<br><br>I thoroughly agree with the declaration's main statement: The statement that<br>the currently-used Plurality voting system is either the worst, or nearly<br>the worst possible voting system. It's effectively a points system that <br>(inexplicably) only allows people to give a point to one candidate--forcing<br>millions of voters to give it all away to an un-liked "lesser-evil", giving<br>eachother the false impression that they like that lesser-evil better than their<br>actual favorite(s). That will never happen with Approval.<br><br>I also thoroughly support the declaration's favorable mention of the five<br>methods that it lists. Though I don't consider IRV to be a good idea, due to<br>voters' seriouls tendency to overcompromise, it would be an alright method<br>were it not for that problem. Of the other four recommended methods, three<br>effectively amount to Approval, my favorite method. The remaining method<br>is an enhancement of Approval.<br><br>Question 6. Briefly explain what characteristics you think are most
important for a voting method to have?<br><br>Question 7. What do you think is the most important election reform
needed where you live (either locally or nationally)? Why is this
reform important?<br><br>My answer:<br><br>Approval Voting. We need it nationally.<br><br>Approval doesn't violate 1-person-1-vote, because every voter can give to<br>each candidate an "Approved" or a "Not-Approved" rating. Marking a candidate's<br>name on the ballot gives to him/her an "Approved" rating.<br><br>The candidate approved by the most people wins. People who now vote for a lesser-evil<br>would be able to approve him/her, but could and would also approve everyone whom <br>they like better, including their favorite. The result: The winner would be<br>someone more genuinely liked than the unliked lesser-evils who win now.<br><br>People who now vote their favorite would be free to approve only him/her in<br>Approval. <br><br>Question 8. What is your opinion on other aspects of election reform
such as reforming money's role in politics or redistricting
(particularly in the US but very interested as well concerning election
reforms internationally)?<br><br>My answer:<br><br>Approval do much to counteract the effect of contribution-bought advertising,<br>when the election-results show how liked the candidates really are. The media<br>and the advertising buyers would no longer be able to deceive voters about that.<br><br>But I suggest that, ideally, all candidates and parties should receive media<br>exposure, including airtime, etc., in proportion to their popularity, as measured<br>by signatures or vote-totals. The media-share of the now-under-advertised candidates<br>would of course start out small, but it would begin increasing, even with a small<br>share of media time. It would soon reach its rightful equilibrium value, as people<br>started hearing other opinions and proposals, for the first time.<br><br>Mike Ossipoff<br><br></pre> </div></body>
</html>