<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'>
I read that, if I might have any credentials, for the purpose of my Democracy Chronicles answers, then I should post them here:<br><br>I'm a longtime participant in this election-methods mailing list. <br><br>I was a founding member of this election-methods mailing list. <br>In fact, it was I who first proposed the "Single-Winner-Committee" that was the basis for this election-methods mailing list.<br><br>I can't say what someone else might have proposed sooner somewhere else, but, so far as I'm personally aware,<br>I was the original proponent and advocate of Condorcet(wv). That's the winning-votes variety of Condorcet, in which the strength<br>of a pairwise defeat is measured by the number of voters ranking the defeater over the defeated, for that pairwise defeat.<br>I pointed out some strategic advantages of this form of Condorcet.<br><br>(But I no longer consider Condorcet to be a good proposal for public elections, due to its FBC failure. However, it's a fine method<br>for electorates, such as some committees, etc., that don't have the excessive timidity and over-compromise-proneness of<br>our public-elections electorate.)<br><br>I've been a longtime advocate of Approval, and I now consider it my favorite method, and unquestionably by far the best<br>public proposal for voting-system reform.<br><br>Mike Ossipoff<br><br> </div></body>
</html>