On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 01:10:15AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > That doesn't follow. You have arbitrarily discarded all the more > reasonable options between. As an example, no vitamin D3 is a bad thing. > OTOH, its MSDS also lists an LD-50.
I'm not talking about vitamins, drugs, nor anything else you might ingest. Nor am I talking about anything which has lethality of any sort. Thus LD-50 is completely irrelevant. I'm talking about logical criteria by which to judge voting systems. For example, I don't have the faintest idea what the LD-50 would be for "stability". Nor do I have a way of knowing how much stability is the "right amount" of stability. Once again, I highly recommend that we pay attention to the criteria documented at http://www.electionmethods.org. In particular, monotonicity is a criteria which I very much want our voting system to satisfy. Monotonicity serves our needs much better than "stability". Thanks, -- Raul
