Re: stability isn't an issue

[Raul Miller <moth@debian.org>]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 01:10:15AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> That doesn't follow. You have arbitrarily discarded all the more
> reasonable options between. As an example, no vitamin D3 is a bad thing.
> OTOH, its MSDS also lists an LD-50.

I'm not talking about vitamins, drugs, nor anything else you might
ingest.  Nor am I talking about anything which has lethality of any sort.
Thus LD-50 is completely irrelevant.

I'm talking about logical criteria by which to judge voting systems.

For example, I don't have the faintest idea what the LD-50 would be for
"stability".  Nor do I have a way of knowing how much stability is the
"right amount" of stability.

Once again, I highly recommend that we pay attention to the criteria
documented at http://www.electionmethods.org.  In particular, monotonicity
is a criteria which I very much want our voting system to satisfy.
Monotonicity serves our needs much better than "stability".

Thanks,

-- 
Raul