From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 22:45:31
christopher diggins wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joel de Guzman"
>>> People who have not yet voted are now more likely vote for the
>>> currently posted top candidates. I for one would have voted
>>> differently now than before, please remove the list.
>> I was hoping Boost folks are more inteligent than that!
> This has nothing to do with intelligence, but rather with the fact that
> people who vote later can have more influence on the outcome than people
> who vote early. I think a running tally is undemocratic and undermines
> the whole point of using IRV.
I disagree with your assumption that "People who have not yet voted
are now more likely vote for the currently posted top candidates".
This assumption is simply flawed. I also disagree with your statement
that "This has nothing to do with intelligence". Of course it has.
People here at boost are very opinionated, which comes with high
intelligence. I am 100% confident that people here will not by swayed
by the currently posted top candidates. Boost folks *are* trend
setters, not dumb followers. As a small experiment, I showed my
wife the current tally, and later, the candidates in full. I asked
her for her preference. Interestingly, her choice was not in the
top 10 of the list. Of course this small experiment is not conclusive.
I think the real issue here is discussion about preferences. Such
discussions, might potentially have some influence on how people
will vote. But we already agreed, from the start, that such
discussions are ok. I personally do not see anything wrong with
Stefan Seefeld, IMO, sums it all up nicely:
Opinions aren't sacred, they can (and should) be
argued about. Let's trust in civilized and constructive discussion
which this list has proven to be good at in the past.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk