I read that message because it was a new subject, and because I didn't think
it was a contentious subject. Then, because the posting was short, and
because the statements were being made for the first time, I felt that they
rate one reply. Replying to this doesn't mean that I'll reply to additional
postings from James with this subject-line. A nice thing about my new policy
is how much it reduces the time-consumingness of my EM participation, and
avoids the task of replying to the same statements again and again. I don' t
know about you, but I was getting tired of that. I'm sure that you (not you,
James) were too.
James says:
To summarize the critique:
I reply:
Why do you use the pretentous word "critique"?
James continues:
If there is widespread compromising-reversal
behavior in methods with very frequent/intense compromising-reversal
incentive (such as plurality and nER-IRV), that doesn't necessarily mean
that there will be widespread compromising-reversal behavior in methods
with minimal compromising-reversal incentive (such as SD(wv) and
beatpath(wv)).
I comment:
Australians have told me that people's reason for favorite-burial in
Australian IRV elections is _not_ because they know IRV's need for that. It
is, they say, instead because people are using Plurality strategy. They
don't know that a rank method can make Plurality's lesser-of-2-evils
strategy unnecessary. That's what Australians have told me is the reason why
people favorite-bury in IRV.
I shouldn't start repeating things for you again, but I observed that
behavior with someone voting in a BeatpathWinner election. Though I said
that I wouldn't favorite-bury with that method, and it isn't really
necessary, the person did it anyway, ranking all of the Democrats over their
favorite. But I didn't assure that person that there couldn't possibly be
any gain from favorite-burial, because that guarantee couldn't be made for
BeatpathWinner.
James continues:
Hence, Mike has not demonstrated that the difference
between zero compromising-reversal incentive and minimal
compromising-reversal incentive is a very major benefit
I comment:
The benefit is that it's possible to give to the voter an absolute guarantee
that they don't need to bury their favorite to protect a 1st-ranked
candidate. An absolute guarantee that can be emphasized to the voter. An
absolute guarantee that can't be given to the IRV voters in Australia, and
that couldn't be given to that favortie-burying voter in that BeatpathWinner
Internet poll.
James continues:
, capable of
outweighing concerns such as Condorcet, Smith, MMC, CL, etc.
I comment:
...whatever that means. These voters who bury their favorite do so because
they believe they need to. Emphatically assuring them that there's
absolutely no need to, to protect a 1st-ranked candidate, will reassure them
that they don't need to, if anything can.
You forgot to explain why you think that compliance with Condorcet, Smith,
MMC, or CL will reassure people to not favorite-bury better than FBC will.
If a method meets Condorcete, Smith, MMC or CL, will you be able to use that
to absolutely guarantee to a voter that burying their favorite couldn't
possibly improve the chances of their 1st-ranked lesser-evil? Though I won't
display your reply, I nevertheless suggest that you consider before
answering that question.
Or maybe you're talking about completely different concerns, and aren't
talking about favorite-burial. But then you're changing the subject,
because favorite-burial was what I was talking about.
When voters are so afraid, timid, demoralized and resigned that they think
they need to bury their favorite, it isn't entirely clear what will be
gained by Condorcet, Smith, MMC, or CL. Answer that if you want to, but I'm
just telling you that you won't be answering it for me, because I won't
display any more of your postings with this subject-line.
It seemed worth answering this--once. But that's it for this subject line. I
won't read more re-assertion from you about this.
As I said, I've made my participation on EM easier and much less
time-consuming.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
