Please do your work on the google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US>. If you understand how, please post the changes here when you're done (to help involve others in the discussion).
JQ 2011/8/28 Richard Fobes <[email protected]> > I'll try to find a balance. I too recognize the importance of starting by > educating voters through non-governmental elections -- so that later it will > be much easier to get fairer election methods adopted in governmental > elections. Yet I was wondering if maybe this explanation about Roberts > Rules of Order was too long, and based on the feedback I'll try to shorten > it. Also I think I can merge it with another request to cover multiple > rounds of voting, which is not yet covered -- and which also is important. > > The other two paragraphs I expect to keep in the next draft -- at the end > as a part of the summary -- but they can be removed if they prove to be > disliked. > > I'll start working on the next draft. It will be longer than the first > because of all the additions that were requested, but fortunately I expect > to be able to shorten it in a few places. > > Richard Fobes > > > > On 8/28/2011 2:13 PM, Ralph Suter wrote: > >> Even if improving public elections is the statement's primary aim, that >> needn't be its only aim -- nor, I'm convinced, should it be. >> >> One point I've tried to make is that one of the best practical means for >> improving the prospects for reforming difficult-to-change public >> elections would be to promote the use of alternative voting and >> representation methods for use in non-public elections and other kinds >> of decisionmaking processes (both public and non-public), including not >> only formal ones such as organizational and formal meeting elections and >> decisions but also informal ones that involve small and temporary groups >> -- and for not only critically important decisions such as presidential >> elections and constitutional referendums but also much less important >> decisions such as groups of friends and co-workers deciding where to eat >> lunch together. (For the latter, I believe approval voting and other >> quick and simple methods are, in virtually all cases, indisputably >> better than more complicated and time-consuming though maybe technically >> superior ones.) >> >> The important things to keep in mind regarding this point are, first, >> that it is much easier to experiment with alternative voting and >> representation methods in other than public elections and, second, that >> doing so has the great added advantage of helping educate people about >> alternative methods and (hopefully) helping persuade much larger numbers >> of people that some alternative methods would be great improvements over >> plurality voting and single-representative legislative districts for use >> in public elections. >> >> -RS >> >> On 8/28/2011 12:45 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote: >> >>> I question adding this collection of paragraphs to the major >>> declaration, which seems more aimed at improving public elections. >>> >> ---- >> > > > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
