Dear Chris Benham, you wrote (9 Jan 2009):
> I only wrote that the beatpath GMC *concept* is > "vulnerable to Mono-add-Plump." Kevin Venzke wrote (9 Jan 2009): > I find it difficult to nail down what this means. > It seems clear from Markus' mails that he isn't > going to discuss a criterion as though it were > a method. Woodall also had to define criteria > differently in order to apply them to sets. But > to apply criteria to a concept? I agree with Kevin. The problem is that you treat a criterion X as if it was a method and then you criticize this "method" X for "being vulnerable" to criterion Y. So in effect, you are criticizing criterion X for not implying criterion Y. But you seem not to see this. Markus Schulze ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
