Dear Abd ul-Rahman, replying to Juho, you wrote: > At 03:29 PM 3/4/2007, Juho wrote: > >Single winner at its > >purest is just electing one of a number of candidates, giving no > >consideration to if it was the same voters that last time got their > >way through. Basic single winner methods maybe have worse utility > >than ones that take distribute the power over a sequence of > >decisions, but I'd still allow use of word "democratic" to describe > >them. Sometimes it makes sense to just forget the history. > > If the goal is making the best decisions, altering the method so that > some specific group "gets its way" would seem less than ideal. It's > noise.
Do you mean to say that the will of a consistent faction of 49% of the electorate, who will never get their way under a majoritarian system, is "noise"?? Yours, Jobst
pgpUmYNrONopY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
