On Saturday, September 29, 2012 02:04:19 Jameson Quinn wrote: > One subdomain of voting methods in which the > peer-reviewed academic literature is decidedly behind > the amateur enthusiast community (that's us) is in its > coverage of different methods, criteria, and > compliances. This lag is unfortunate
Hello Jameson and all, When I first heard about this project, a few weeks ago, I was a bit nonplussed: "Another EM wiki?" But the way Jameson describes it now, it makes better sense. Everything that enhances the profile of better EMs, make them more respectable vis-à-vis the academic community (and the policy-maker community!) can only help. So, overall, I am in favour. As far as debating opinions is concerned, there is already this mailing list and other places where everyone is free to debate. (A certain web site comes to mind...) But I like the idea of A peer-reviewed "EM journal". I am not too sure about the details of the proposal, though. For example, Mediawiki is a terrible software. I very much doubt it's adapted to the job. If it were me, I'd rather hack a Drupal-based web site with its own customised module. Do as you wish. My concerns are only details. I still very much support the end goals of the project. I could provide free-hosting on my dedicated server. Yours, Augustin. Friends: http://www.reuniting.info/ My projects: http://astralcity.org/ http://lesenjeux.fr/ http://linux.overshoot.tv/ http://overshoot.tv/ http://charityware.info/ http://masquilier.org/ http://openteacher.info/ http://minguo.info/ http://jacqueslemaire.fr/ http://www.wechange.org/ http://searching911.info/ .
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
