Russ & EM list-- Markus's & Bruce's misunderstanding of WDSC & SDSC, whether that misunderstanding is genuine or not, has as its basis an unstated misunderstanding (genuine or otherwise) about the meaning of "B". Here's what I claim is the meaning of "B" that we all accept: When used in a definition, "B" means: Whatever 1 particular candidate you choose to be the 1 candidate who shall be referred to by the letter designation "B", for the purposes of that definition, provided that that candidate isn't referred to by any different letter designation in that definition. For the meaning of "A", substitute "A" for "B" in the above paragraph. [that concludes my claim about what "A" & "B" mean] I want to emphasize that the above isn't s definition that has to be written with my criteria definitions. It's the obvious & universally accepted meaning for "A" & "B" in a definition. Usually we don't need to write it, because it's universally understood. Markus, do you believe that "B" has a different meaning that conflicts with or contradicts the above meaning? In particular, do you have a meaning for "A" & "B" that justifies your claims about criteria ambiguity? If so, would you tell us what you think "B" means? If not, then look at it this way and you'll understand it: After you choose what candidates to call A & B, and if there's a majority who prefer A to B, then WDSC & SDSC say something about what that majority can do. Surely you understand now that WDSC & SDSC say nothing about what anyone else can or cannot do, and that WDSC & SDSC don't specify any conditions regarding how anyone else votes. Lest it seem that my criteria are difficult to understand because Markus & Bruce (claim to) misunderstand them, and because I've been forced to spell out what "B" means, let me point out that when someone wants to, that person can insist on asking similar questions about any definition, demanding definitions that are thorough, explicit & unambiguous, and wordy, to a degree that would never be acceptable for public use. So I hope Markus won't now tell me that I should drop WDSC & SDSC because they're too complicated, after he's made it necessary for me to answer his unnecessary questions and spell out universally understood things that would never have to be spelled out when talking to the public. Markus, as I said we appreciate & welcome your criticisms of the defensive strategy criteria, but if you don't tell us better criticisms than you have been, then you're just wasting our time. Mike Ossipoff _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
