On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Sean Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > I really have no clue what this means; odds are good that I'd just (as vote > collector) decide that if there was any complexity at all, I'd just resolve > the darn thing as PRESENT due to ambiguity.
Wouldn't replacing the vote collector make more sense than replacing the much more fair voting system? Who wants American-style "plurality rules"?
