Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 2:40 AM
At 03:07 PM 12/2/2005, James Gilmour wrote:
On this point we shall have to disagree. Just because you express
your liking for A and your dislike for B more strongly than I do,
does not mean your vote should count for any more
At 03:07 PM 12/2/2005, James Gilmour wrote:
On this point we shall have to disagree. Just because you express
your liking for A and your dislike for B more strongly than I do,
does not mean your vote should count for any more than mine, or than
anyone else's, when we are asked to choose
Gilmour:
What I had in mind was if I vote 1, 2, 3, 4 (1 = most preferred,
the one I want to see win) for candidates A, B, C, D,
and you vote 100, 99, 2, 1 (1 = most preferred) for the
same four candidates, it would be fundamentally undemocratic if
your vote counted for more in determining the
Smith Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 7:35 PM
Exactly wrong! Social utility is THE overriding goal which
trumps and encapsulates all else.
On this point we shall have to disagree. Just because you express your liking
for A and your dislike for B more
strongly than I do, does not mean your
On 12/2/05, Warren Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you are deluded in thinking that your kind of voting is more fundamentallydemocratic because it omits strength of preference information.Deluded is certainly a word that comes to mind regarding the suggestion that people will, in significant
Warren,
--- Warren Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
Let me attempt to reply. First of all, by expressing ABCD in that order
you
*already* are expressing a more-strong preference for A over D
than for, say, C over D. In many voting systems your vote would
therefore have a stronger effect
