Really, I’m done (for the time being) with the Burlington IRV failure thing. In the end, to me it looks like this:
1. IRV is a better system than plurality voting (which, though I do feel this way, there’s a very decent argument on the contrary).
2. Regardless of any relative strengths or merit, IRV is prone to a number of flaws (errors in logic, i.e., mathematical errors and paradoxes) and most certainly a number of these were demonstrated during the 2009 election for Mayor of Burlington, VT.
3. IRV is the current law in Burlington and under the law (a legitimate and in no way “un-Constitutional” method of calculating election winners) Bob Kiss won, should have won, and is the winner.
4. Primarily because of the first statement, IRV should continue to be the system that Burlington chooses- unless and until…
5. There needs to be sufficient public eduction and exposure to practical social study’s and mathematics, among other things, in school so that the public at large can engage knowingly about important topics such as fair and equal democratic decision making processes.
6. Primarily because of #2 and #5 it would seem minimal to continue to strive in every facet of life to build a world in which every single person regardless of what their skin color or belief system or sexual identity or place of birth or place of residence or anything of the sort is free to live exploring the complete and full un-hindered creative magnificence of life as they so choose (so long as their choice doesn’t hinder upon the same to others, of course).
7. From #6, hence how or who we vote for is but a fraction of the political power that can and should be exerted by the general population.
8. All things the same- as I said at the top, I’m pretty done talking about IRV. But, over on GMD a gentleman named Rama became- well, pretty repetitive in his B.S.. It kinda killed what could have been at least a small but interesting exploration of an important issue. It’s obnoxious enough to try and have an intelligent conversation and see it run-over by such mental dribble; but then he decided to take it personal and posted his own attack, pretty much against me, pretty much summarized as “wdh3 is a liar, an idiot, and a lying idiot”.
Well, who fucking cares?
I don’t know if he cares, but Temple Univeristy mathematician Warren D. Smith at least has a response:
(Rama Schneider) argued, rather repetitively, that Kiss’s election was valid because he won according to the rules of the IRV system. Essentially, (Rama) would simply repeat the rules, then state “Kiss won.” If anyone pointed out a logical pathology present in the election, he would say that was a “what if” scenario, but the actual scenario was: Kiss won.
In some sense, Ramabahama is entirely right. (And we actually appreciate his argument rather more than most preceding ones since we think he was actually being honest about it, not trying to deceive!)
And if the election rules had instead been “we will kill a goat, and if the entrails end up pointing South, then Simpson wins” we daresay Ramabahama would have argued that this was a fully legitimate Simpson victory and repeated those rules. Any attempt by us to say that the election rules themselves were illogical would have been met (we presume) by simply claiming those were “what if” scenarios. The actual scenario was: the entrails pointed South, and those were the rules – so Simpson won!
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 1, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Peter Buknatski
Where’s your April Fool crap? You could have Gay-Married Michael Colby to Anthony Pollina on your blog here and had the ceremony performed by Douglas saying: “I now pronouce you I told you so, folks.”
April 10, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Rama Schneider
What a coward … and a liar.
Find where I said “wdh3 is a liar, an idiot, and a lying idiot” and provide me the link and text .. please .. or stop making up words as fast as you were making up numbers regarding IRV.
And Rama Schneider (that would be me) simply kept repeating that one can’t make up numbers and claim that’s math every time someone made up numbers to prove a point.
Much easier to hide in some obscure blog and pout … isn’t it?
April 10, 2009 at 5:11 pm
wdh3
Again Rama, you took our disagreement and went personal (as with one of your posts of GMD). If you think your point or “logic” is helped by calling me names, or that I’m somehow intimidated by it, you’re way off base. I don’t care all too much if some piece of shit named Rama wants to call me a coward and a liar…. fuck you you diarrhea-breath whining dick-wart ass-wad…. see, that didn’t really help this conversation, and didn’t matter too much to you, did it? No, leave the personal attacks for the school yard, you cum napkin.
And grow the fuck up with your “find where I said….” B.S.. You’re mantra over at GMD. It’s the same problem you have with the IRV analysis- some of us grown-ups have this very complicated cognitive ability in which we can think in abstract terms, and make inferences based on the facts or statements before us.
And this, Rama, is my blog- it’s not a place where I hide but rather where I place things out in the open.
I’ve disagreed with many people for many reasons in my life, but I’ve very seldom seen someone react to a disagreement in such a bizarre and childish (and senseless) way. So don’t come back here- when I go to GMD I know I’ve gotta deal with liberals and wingnuts and idiots, but this is my blog for my enjoyment and you chose to insult me with a personal attack and make no point whatsoever to further your so-called “argument” (a conversation which I’ve already said I’m done with anyway). So, bye-bye. I would say it’s been fun, but actually it’s been like trying to hold a conversation with the stuff that comes out of my ass after a meal at Julio’s- nothing but floor grime and re-processed lard.
April 11, 2009 at 12:04 am
fasteddy
Damn Wes…I didn’t think you had that level of insult prowess in ya…
“cum-napkin” – LOL :^D
April 11, 2009 at 12:27 am
Peter Buknatski
Jesus Christski! They oughta have a TV show about bloggin’. Better than Jerry Springer: “Why you sonofabitch whorebastard retard! I know you fucked my sister and now you fuckin’ fucked my post!” “I didn’t fuck your post bitch! I wouldn’t go near it without a fuckin’ body condom, you lowlife piece ‘a…” “You fuckin’ lyin’ fuckin’ mothafuckin’ fuckwad pigshit bastard! I’m gonna post a fuckin’ post all over every fuckin’ blog in the Universe about how you done me, and my sister, and I’m gonna get a blog lawyer and sue your fuckin’ ass for every fuckin’ thing ya got including your sleazy shit formatted blow-job blog and you’ll fuckin’ never be able to do a hand-job post again unless you fuckin’ move to the fuckin’ trailer blogs where your douche-bag shit belongs in the first fuckin’ place, cunt bastard!” “Don’t call me that ‘less your fuckass cock-sucking lawyer’s a fuckin’ steroid monster-fucker, or I’ll wipe the floor with your dirty bitch ass, ya slimey slit. And then your sister’s too!”
Well…we have to pause now for this message. When we come back we’ll find out from our Surprise Blogger waiting backstage just what the real story is on all this fuckin’ shit and who fucked who and called who a dildo dipshit asshole. Stay with us.
April 11, 2009 at 12:32 am
Moike Colby
Geez. And I thought the “Ron Paul ass-fluid” comment was good. This one’s got more good lines than should be allowed in one blog comment to another. My favorite? The Julio’s line. Mostly because I always thought that was just happening to me after eating that gawdawful stuff. Ass misery loves company, I guess.
Oh yeah, and remind me not to pick a verbal fight with you, Wes.
Cheers.
April 11, 2009 at 6:22 am
wdh3
As they say, float like a butterfly….
April 11, 2009 at 12:55 am
Peter Buknatski
“And that fuckin’ Colby too! You tell him to stay out of it or I’ll have his fuckin’ ass behind bars and he’ll have to do his fuckin’ blog bending over all the time! Shit Bitch Piss Cunt Screw! And you too, Jerry!!!!!”
April 11, 2009 at 2:06 am
wdh3
Received from Rama through the “contact me” button on this site:
>So you’re willing to attack somebody by name, but you’re not willing to
> have them respond?
>
> The word coward definitely applies.
Rama, you started all of the personal attacks, I merely responded and I am not willing to use/allow you to use my blog as the engine for a merry-go-round of insults. I’m sorry that you (first) weren’t able to understand the complex math that I used in my IRV analysis and (second) resorted to personal insults and name calling as part of what otherwise was merely a debate on a political issue. In relation to the former- how and why you’d get so worked-up over arguing with an anarchist about his analysis of a voting system is beyond me. For the latter, I have disallowed you from posting here. You think whatever you think of me and I think what I think of you- neither matters and so lets move on with our lives. I have nothing more to say to you or regarding this matter.