James, --- James Gilmour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > As I have said > before, and in other EM threads, the preferences recorded on an IRV > ballot are CONTINGENCY choices. It would be a great help to all > these discussions if both proponents and opponents of IRV would recognise > this historical fact.
It doesn't seem to me that one would need to understand the mentality or history behind an election method in order to judge it against other methods. It isn't really "the thought that counts" with election methods. Maybe pointing out IRV's strategy advantages (i.e. lower preferences are "contingency choices") would paint a broader picture about IRV, but the fact that e.g. Dave Ketchum doesn't value these advantages, doesn't in my mind undermine his criticisms... Kevin Venzke _____________________________________________________________________________ Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail http://mail.yahoo.fr ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info