2011/11/27 David L Wetzell <[email protected]>
> meh,
> I don't want to take bet number 1.
>
Understood. Please notice what you're saying here: you think you are
unlikely in practice (less than 17%, if you were a rational
money-maximizer) to convince people on this list to line up behind IRV. I
obviously agree with this assessment, or I would not have offered the bet.
So, what does that mean for the utility of signing the statement? I know
how I'd answer that question, but I want to know how you do.
> So I'll take bet number 2,
>
OK, we'll talk off-list about settling the details of bet 2 ("10 years from
now, IF there have been over 20 independent cases of voting reform in the
USA, then 10 of them will/will not be IRV.")
Jameson
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
