I'd said: On 4/17/2012 2:54 PM, Michael Ossipoff wrote: >* Richard &/or Jameson (or anyone else too): *>* Can I get the e-mail address of Adrian at Democracy Chronicles? *>* Mike Ossipoff * I am not supplying Adrian's direct email address because I have recommended to him that he get voting-method-related questions answered through the forum so that statements (both positive and negative) about voting methods are peer-reviewed. (This approach applies to me as well.)
[endquote] Well, if you're sure that the group-review is important enough to veto what Adrian himself requested. If it really works as fairly as you described, then I guess I wouldn't strongly object to the procedure that you suggest. You want all communication to be received by all, so that anyone can immediately correct any _objective and verifiable_ mis-statement that they find in what someone else says. I trust that, when reviewing articles, the objections and expressed disagreements will be about verifiable objective matters of fact, rather than EM's usual bickering about personal opinions and preferences, and personal judgements and estimates about unpredictable matters. We get a lot of that on EM, and it's difficult to imagine sthere being another kind of discussion here. About the review: I trust that we're talking about open discussion among, at least, everyone involved. I don't object to open discussion. You continued: I suggest being patient... [endquote] ??? Whoa there. I merely naively asked for the e-mail address that was requested, by its owner, to be made available. I didn't express any impatience. I didn't have prior knowledge of your format plans. And no, I'm not arguing or complaining about your policy. Just pointing out that there was no reason to perceive impatience. You continued: and waiting for their article about the Declaration to appear, and hopefully shortly after that time (if not sooner) Adrian may have signed up to join this forum. Keep in mind, as already conveyed in Adrian's message that I posted here, there will be a series of articles about each of the experts who answered his interview questions, spaced about one week apart. [endquote] Yes, that was explained in his e-mail.. The general article on the declaration will be first, then the individual articles, at intervals of up to roughly a week. It's encouraging that Democracy Chronicles is going to publish a series of articles on better voting systems. Plurality is disastrously bad for democracy. There's far too much infighting among advocates of alternative voting systems. Statements can be made, and justified. A few questions can be asked and answered. All with a rule about strict verifiability. Discussion that lists method properties needn't get...like it usually gets on EM. People just state properties, and agree on what they can about them. I don't deny that, by some considerations, ICT has advantages over Approval, for instance. But I tell why I claim that Approval is more enactable, and why its more obvious FBC compliance would be more reassuring to voters Mike Ossipoff
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
