Re:[EM] Settle for how much less?

Mike Ossipoff wrote: Wouldn't you agree that if IRV gets adoped, voters will then be reluctant to replace it for a long time? Good point. As I think more about it, if third parties are shut out with IRV the public will perceive that the fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our election methods but

Re:[EM] Settle for how much less?

From: Alex Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:[EM] Settle for how much less? [...] The IRV initiative dilemma: If it loses many people will conclude that the public doesn't want election reform. If it passes we'll be stuck with a second-rate reform (or a step backwards, depending on

Re: [EM] Open and Closed Lists (was ...STV for Candidate...)

At 02:56 +0200 7.2.2002, Blake Cretney wrote: Adam Tarr wrote: ... All of these advantages are shared by open list. (Note that in Open list, there's no reason to stop people from just voting for the party, a la closed list, and not voting within the party. I only mention this for the sake