I've always replied to Don as if he actually seriously meant what he said. Often he doesn't. But let's not give him too much credit. For instance, he may have very well believed the hippo logic in his letter "we will deliver no mail before its time". No one can say for sure. Was he being coy? Only his hairdresser knows for sure. But it might have been just another instance of coyness. Meaning that he justified IRO by a standard (the Abused Candidate Rule) which was identical to IRO's definition. I'm not saying that he didn't believe what he was saying. But it could also be that he's still on that thing of claiming that Condorcet is being used to justify Condorcet, and demonstrating it by using IRO to justify IRO. Continued in subsequent message. I didn't get to "missed distinctions" yet. I'm using separate short messages due to frequent computer or system problems that result in the loss of messages before mailing them. Missed distinctions next. Mike --
