James--
You say:
I'm not an imbecile, and if you can't recognize that fact...
I reply:
But you could start doing your part to make it easier to recognize that fact. So far you often haven't been doing a very good job.
But you have a very good point when you say that our voting system is not something to get adventurous with, when there's any risk of in any way making it worse.
The fact that all rank methods are going to be worse than Plurality in some ways suggests that it would be very premature to propose a rank method, without some serious longterm studies.
But will that be enough?
How can you, a rank-method advocate, using theoretical arguments, assure us that your method's Participation and Consistency failures won't cause a bad problem? Are we to risk a possibly worse method just on your assurance? Do you think that anything short of longterm successful use can assure people that rank methods' failures won't be serious?
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar � get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
