Good Morning, Michael
re: "But the infrastructure you propose has problems ..."
The identification and careful examination of those problems is my
primary reason for participating in the discussion on this site. As
I've said before, I learn less from those who agree with me than from
those who don't.
However, to be helpful, dissent must not only be carefully considered
and rationally presented, it must address counter-points with equal
care. Some exchanges may fail of resolution, but they must be carried
on to isolate the specific point of disagreement so others can bring the
force of their reason to bear on the question.
re: "... and when they are raised you tend to respond with a
level of passion that others perceive as anger."
I suspect you are right, even though ...
"O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!"
It seems sad that a passionate search for a more democratic electoral
method may be seen as anger by folks professing a belief in democracy.
Still, I shouldn't be surprised. From what I've seen, many who profess
belief in democracy lack faith in the judgment of the people.
re: "(Your proposal is interesting, all the same.)"
I'm glad you find it so. It would be helpful if you could outline its
shortcomings. I will, of course, express my point of view
(passionately?) in the hope we can isolate specific failings and reduce
their adverse effect.
In preparing this message, I re-visited your site (http://zelea.com). I
have two comments regarding recombinant text and will send them separately.
Thank you for your insight.
Fred Gohlke
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
