On Nov 8, 2009, at 6:33 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Nov 5, 2009, at 1:35 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
...
Unlike FairVote et al, we don't have a strong voice saying "Hey
public, if you think Plurality sucks, implement [method here]".
but if FairVote won't keep all of their eggs in the IRV basket,
then we need someone to do the same for Condorcet.
FairVote doesn't? I thought their problem was that they had
"committed" to IRV as the electoral method from heaven, and thus
they have to stick with it rather than, for instance, say "Oh,
oops, we were wrong, turns out that system is actually better".
when i'm typing away and composing sentences in my head, sometimes i
make the mistake of the "Wicked Bible". usually the spurious
omission or spurious inclusion of the word "not" has the tendency to
change the meaning of a sentence to something not intended. FairVote
*does* put all of their eggs in the IRV basket. and i have many
times taken issue with them about it. i've sorta tired of repeatedly
refuting Rob Ritchie recently.
--
r b-j [email protected]
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
