On Jan 10, 2008 2:05 AM, James Gilmour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > to put correct this defect we have no option but to sacrifice something > else, e.g. "later no harm".
I'm not sure later-no-harm is a good thing in the first place. That would be nice, but all the evidence to date shows that it is > impossible. No-one has yet devised a voting system that incorporates all of > the desirable features. The evidence does not show that this is impossible. If nobody has designed a voting system that incorporates all the desirable features this could mean: A. It is impossible to do so. B. We haven't figured out a way to do so. C. Our criteria are misguided. Remember: most innovations in human history were not available for most of human history.
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
