tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post3947047613276904372..comments2024-03-28T23:39:08.616-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Woke Media vs Bill Maher. A tiff that only serves the KGB-confederates.David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger177125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-51588138585766069382021-09-23T23:54:17.490-07:002021-09-23T23:54:17.490-07:00So didn't you and some group of like minded pe...So didn't you and some group of like minded people offer a few years ago some reward for victims of political blackmail to come forward and disclose what is happening?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12972130383828143841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-68040022786141402902021-08-28T17:47:27.576-07:002021-08-28T17:47:27.576-07:00onwardonwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23541988423756699302021-08-28T14:30:02.207-07:002021-08-28T14:30:02.207-07:00Native American:
Since you asked politely...
My ...Native American:<br /><br />Since you asked politely...<br /><br />My view of the Liar paradox, Russell's paradox, Cantor's paradox, Godel's paradox, and many others, is that they demonstrate that paradox exists, and therefore logic must expand to accommodate paradox values for statements. On beyond binary! <br /><br />There are many paradox logics; the simplest is Kleenean Logic, which contains three truth values: F = false, T = true, and I = intermediate. Kleenean logic's truth tables are defined by these rules:<br />X and T = X;<br />X and F = F;<br />X and X = X;<br />X or T = T;<br />X or F = X;<br />X or X = X;<br />not T = F ; not I = I ; not F = T<br /><br />Kleenean logic is deductively complete; that is there's a finite set of identities that derive all identities in Kleenean logic.<br /><br />Kleenean logic is also completely self-referential; that is, any set of Kleenean logic variables defined in terms of each other can be consistently assigned values.<br /><br />Because not I = I, all of the paradoxes have solutions. No need for type theories, transfinite cardinals, or the rest of that fog. <br /><br />I did my graduate work on 'diamond logic', which is four-valued, contains Kleenean logic as a sublogic, and can be interpreted as an intuitionistic logic, and also as a dialethic logic. <br /><br /><br />As for if paradox is lexical or relates to reality... Paradox has to do with logic, which is lexical by definition. But when I consider the world around me, I detect no transfinite cardinals, but I have detected plenty of paradoxes. My favorite is the Paradox of the Boundary. Is dawn day or night?<br />Paradoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821968120388981470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72726141391863295002021-08-28T12:59:56.840-07:002021-08-28T12:59:56.840-07:00I did like the Back To The Future referencer, thou...I did like the Back To The Future referencer, though it actually means the opposite of what he thinks it means. (Cue Inigo Montoya!)<br /><br /><br /><br />onward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88916763393898095322021-08-28T12:47:23.690-07:002021-08-28T12:47:23.690-07:00Sergei:
so why do you try to reduce it to "t...Sergei:<br /><i><br />so why do you try to reduce it to "they are liars, we are great" if not because of strictly partisan reasons?<br /></i><br /><br />I don't claim greatness, nor do I have to. I claim to be greater than Republicans because they are so awful. Which is a very low bar. My cat is preferable to a Republican.<br /><br /><i><br />"That's you reading "we all white feather angels" into it. I never said anything of the sort."<br /><br />But implied, Larry. You implied it. All turtles way down. Your answer to each and every question this far are just that - "because they are liars". <br /></i><br /><br />Because they are. Which says nothing about how great (or not) I am.<br /><br /><i><br />While that absolutely anti-logical. Nobody can lie ALL the time.(imagine some Absolute Liar... type who will say "What a rainy day" on a clear sky Sunday - but that is rediculous, <br /></i><br /><br />Donald Trump.<br /><br /><i><br />because ALL you'd need to make him truth-teller - negation of every his claim)<br /></i><br /><br />You can pretty much do that with any Republican politician. Or at least understand that when they assert that liberals do something, they mean that they themselves do that thing.<br /><br /><i><br />And I'll add. You are easily allow to yourself to "read into it" that "that showing their values".<br />But no, nobody should assume that your words mean what they mean? And that your screed showing YOUR values too.<br /></i><br /><br />Nothing wrong with showing your values. I hope that mine are clear. My point was that the value that they clearly show is that of elevating partisanship over journalistic integrity. It was the value itself that I was disparaging, not the fact that they showed it. Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84517756286428606122021-08-28T12:17:46.001-07:002021-08-28T12:17:46.001-07:00Honestly, I've been skipping the comments. Lif...Honestly, I've been skipping the comments. Life is short, and my reading list is long…Robertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-46521438847495550272021-08-28T10:44:46.597-07:002021-08-28T10:44:46.597-07:00But has anyone else noticed? He is either vetting ...But has anyone else noticed? He is either vetting his comments by better English speakers in that Kremlin basement or else using better grammar-checking programs. Honestly, it's the only reason I skim through samples.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42538885700472394002021-08-28T10:43:24.613-07:002021-08-28T10:43:24.613-07:00Blah blah de blah blah. Writhing and squirming to ...<br />Blah blah de blah blah. Writhing and squirming to maintain adesperate stance that he is smarter and can see while all the smart people are blind. It is THE most common mental ailment in America today. It manifests as "both sides-ism" and as declarations that almost all scientists are mindless drones seeking conformity.<br /><br />Quick skim (ten seconds wasted:<br /><br />Alas, your 'logic" is used only to neutralize the existence of facts which would demolish almost every stance you take. A blind person can certainly tell night from day, in countless ways.<br /><br />Any of us here can prove Republicans aren't 'harmless" and would gl;adly test it before panels of the wisest and most meticulous fact people available. Likewise almost any of your subjectivist-cancelation-and-denial-of-all facts incantations. The WAGER STAKES aspect has two functions... (1) to make that effort worth our while, since you would make us go to all the effort of squirm chasing and then vanish. (2) Testing your honor... and clearly you have none. And I stand by that fact proving your monicker is a lie.<br /><br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17338134739686889092021-08-28T07:54:21.774-07:002021-08-28T07:54:21.774-07:00Who does this remind you of?
https://www.nytimes....Who does this remind you of?<br /><br />https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/27/opinion/alt-right-taliban.html<br /><i><br />As the Taliban swept through Afghanistan in August, a Gen Z alt-right group ran a Twitter account devoted to celebrating their progress. Tweets in Pashto juxtaposed two laughing Taliban fighters with pictures meant to represent American effeminacy. Another said, the words auto-translated into English, “Liberalism did not fail in Afghanistan because it was Afghanistan, it failed because it was not true. It failed America, Europe and the world see it.”<br />...<br /></i><br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-92225042620497794722021-08-28T00:08:19.953-07:002021-08-28T00:08:19.953-07:00D.Brn
And hence, they push this insane drivel tha...D.Brn<br /><br />And hence, they push this insane drivel that N.A. keeps doubling down with... "There is no fact! You and your opponents are just as right! You say it's daytime and your opponent says it's night... how can anyone tell for sure?"<br /><br /><br />Oh, I overlooked that.<br /><br />But that is... that is clear and direct lie.<br /><br />In ever my post I explicitly reffered to facts (that there is biases, that there is ambiguities in meanings of words, that there is political affiliations and prejudges). And tried to analise my opponents words with Logic.<br /><br />While my opponent(s?) mustered only that "fact"... that they just feel it that it's true.<br /><br /><br />Still, I'm still open to discuse it all.<br /><br /><br /><br />"You say it's daytime and your opponent says it's night... how can anyone tell for sure?"<br /><br />Well, there is blind people. To whom daylight is as good as night.<br />There is daltonics. And etc.<br /><br />That's why we need Logic, Science to collect all veriety of facts and to make correct inferences of em.<br />And Constant Vigilance and Self-Critique to not fall into pitfall of self-delusion.Native Americannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54917590375396603502021-08-27T23:43:01.875-07:002021-08-27T23:43:01.875-07:00D.Brin
They flee.
I just asked clarification qu...D.Brin<br /><br />They flee.<br /><br /><br />I just asked clarification questions:<br />what exactly bet do you want from me?<br />why do you think that I interested?<br /><br />You swiftly ignored it.<br /><br />It seems your algo is too primitive.<br />And/or too flawed, giving too much false-positives.Native Americannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81750613899291155942021-08-27T23:39:11.043-07:002021-08-27T23:39:11.043-07:00Paradoctor
Some of Plato's Forms are examples...Paradoctor<br /><br />Some of Plato's Forms are examples of themselves, and some are not.<br /><br />Thank you. We know/care what Russel's/Barber Paradox are.<br />Well, at least some of us.<br /><br />It's more interesting to hear what do you think - is it just lexical, or maybe have some deep roots in our Reality?<br /><br />Also, I heard that mathematicians claimed it as resolved.<br /><br />And one more, as math-wise, what do you think about intuitionism?<br /><br /><br />Golem XIV? I read it once; a deep piece; maybe I'll re-read it soon.<br /><br />There is his other book. "Summa Technologia".<br />Well, I do not propose to read it. That is bulky piece of philosophical non-fiction.<br />Still, it sums up ideas from all his other works.<br /><br /><br /><br />L.Hart<br /><br />Make it "Most influential Republicans are liars." We observe their behavior and their specific lies every day. I'll cop to there being a handful of exceptions.<br /><br />I already answered to this higher. Politics - it's inherently controversial type of activity, activity where True Motives never by noone stated out loud, so why do you try to reduce it to "they are liars, we are great" if not because of strictly partisan reasons?<br />To thrill up your supporters and to shuddup all questions. Like Reps do.<br />But I like questions, and do not like being shut.<br /><br /><br />That's you reading "we all white feather angels" into it. I never said anything of the sort.<br /><br />But implied, Larry. You implied it. All turtles way down. Your answer to each and every question this far are just that - "because they are liars". While that absolutely anti-logical. Nobody can lie ALL the time.(imagine some Absolute Liar... type who will say "What a rainy day" on a clear sky Sunday - but that is rediculous, because ALL you'd need to make him truth-teller - negation of every his claim)<br /><br />And I'll add. You are easily allow to yourself to "read into it" that "that showing their values".<br />But no, nobody should assume that your words mean what they mean? And that your screed showing YOUR values too.<br /><br /><br />(rinse, repeat ad infinitum)<br /><br />Yes.<br />Algorithm of scientific discovery. As well as basicly rational analisys is like this.<br /><br />1) Find you a problem.<br />2) Define it and (re)frame it correctly.<br />3) Try to extract logical implications.<br />4) Devise and perform experiments to gain more data<br /><b>repeat ad infinitum</b><br /><br />Or, in somewhat more poetic way.<br /><br /><b>-The road to wisdom?<br />—Well, it's plain and simple to express: Err and err and err again, but less and less and less. — Piet Hein.</b><br /><br /><br /><br />D.Brin<br /><br />They flee.<br /><br />And this proves that "Native American" is nothing of the sort, because most men from that background understand the notion of honor and wagers. I've never known a First Nations person who did not.<br /><br /><br />I'll ignore this dirty accusation.<br />And will kindly suggest you to (re)watch Back To The Future, Third Part.<br />Last couple minutes that summs it up, from all three films -- that it's deeply unwise to react on shallow taunts like "what, are you Chicken?!!".<br /><br />Especially, if that taunts are deeply misplaced.<br />I'm not Repuglican. But I am not Dem too.<br />While I think Reps are mindless bonkers. But they mostly harmless.<br />While, some ideas from Left, while absolutely crazy, also are quite dangerous.<br /><br />Well, still, I could help you to refine that taunts. As they falling flatly on their face, being too transparent and silly.<br />As well as keep in check your false-positives rate.<br /><br />Well, I'm sure, you will not be fond of such generous help at all.<br />But, that is part of experiment.Native Americannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-34915966032158285562021-08-27T15:41:58.343-07:002021-08-27T15:41:58.343-07:00scidata:
Would a double-blind double-bind dilemma ...<br />scidata:<br />Would a double-blind double-bind dilemma be when neither you nor the bot know which is the butt of the joke? The Twilight Zone version would be two bots failing at trolling each other.<br /><br />Native American: <br />Golem XIV? I read it once; a deep piece; maybe I'll re-read it soon.<br />Here's some advice. You came in swinging. We don't mind that too much; we're annoying contrarians too; but we demand coherence and concision in our snark. Spell-check helps. (I shall forever treasure your 'Tribadism' typo.) Read and edit several times before hitting Send.Paradoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821968120388981470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-52837274467496188402021-08-27T15:23:47.832-07:002021-08-27T15:23:47.832-07:00Larry Hart:
Specifically, it's Russell's P...Larry Hart:<br />Specifically, it's Russell's Paradox of the set of all sets, and only those sets, that do not contain themselves. That set contains itself as much as it does not: a liar paradox. Applying this to Platonic forms seems natural, as does:<br /><br />The watchmen watch all those, and only those, who do not watch themselves. Who watches the watchmen?<br />Answer: they watch themselves as much as they do not. <br /><br />So Russell's Paradox afflicts both Platonism and the surveillance state!Paradoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821968120388981470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-65987163880098698042021-08-27T13:20:50.902-07:002021-08-27T13:20:50.902-07:00There were many rumors of overtures through deniab...<i>There were many rumors of overtures through deniable third parties… and both Gore and Nader would have had reason to deny it. But the simple truth is, Nader… and later Stein… got ego-drenched sugarplum fantasies egged on by sycophants and fans.</i><br /><br />Thank you.<br /><br />My first thought was that minor political parties are more susceptible to turn into cult-like organizations, but then again, you have Trump capering the Republican party.<br /><br />I think the main problem of these parties is that they never had the chance to mature in government, having to commit realpolitik and gaining flak for it from its base, yet somehow surviving the backlash and continuing, building political capital over time and attracting more and more of the political center. In other words: If you have never a chance of entering government, you can stay at your fundamentalist roots.<br />Der Ogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00977602334642769985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-13897490254351131602021-08-27T09:51:10.462-07:002021-08-27T09:51:10.462-07:00Depends. You are a kind of liar if you frantically...Depends. You are a kind of liar if you frantically cling to denail that the memes you clutch originate from liars and are disprovable lies and hence the very notion of DISPROOF must be denounced.<br /><br />Or else, reciting "I still believe this pit of liars can be reformed!" (Susan Collins)<br /><br />If you use that definition, then yeah. All liars, all the way down.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43876714401500679712021-08-27T06:25:40.736-07:002021-08-27T06:25:40.736-07:00Dr Brin:
And this proves that "Native Americ...Dr Brin:<br /><i><br />And this proves that "Native American" is nothing of the sort,<br /></i><br /><br />I just realized what NA's speech patterns remind me of. The Bizarro character from Superman comics. A mix of bad syntax and saying the opposite of what one means. "Me am so happy me don't want to kill myself." That sort of thing.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88716683049830637122021-08-27T06:00:53.734-07:002021-08-27T06:00:53.734-07:00Too good not to share...
https://www.electoral-vo...Too good not to share...<br /><br />https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2021/Senate/Maps/Aug27.html#item-7<br /><i><br />We begin in San Antonio, TX, home of Louis Tussaud's Palace of Wax. You may have head of Madame Tussaud, who achieved much wealth and fame in the wax museum business. Louis was her great-grandson and did not have, shall we say, quite the same gift for realistic renderings of famous people. People bought tickets 100 years ago, and still buy them today, for purposes of camp and/or irony, so they can laugh at the sculptures, rather than marveling at them.<br /><br />The San Antonio location, as you might guess, has a Trump figure:<br /><br />...<br /><br />Anyhow, Tussaud's has had to remove the Trump sculpture. It's not because he's an alleged tax cheat, or an alleged sexual predator, or due to his having fomented insurrection against the United States, though. No, it's because visitors to the museum kept punching the sculpture, and wax is not really up to the rigors of being used as a punching bag. Undoubtedly, many folks are lamenting that they didn't know to hustle down to San Antonio to get their shots in before it was too late.<br /></i>Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-78073765484868459452021-08-27T05:43:30.785-07:002021-08-27T05:43:30.785-07:00Paradoctor:
Here's how to short-circuit Plato...Paradoctor:<br /><i><br />Here's how to short-circuit Platonism, paradox style:<br /></i><br /><br />Heh. Just realized that your nym plays on "paradox". Whoosh!<br /><br />The example you gave is probably difficult to parse for someone who hasn't heard it before, but it's a variation on the paradox invoked by ascertaining the True/False value of the statement, "This sentence is a lie."Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25561859082992008922021-08-27T05:43:15.822-07:002021-08-27T05:43:15.822-07:00Sergei:
"Republicans are liars"
In Log...Sergei:<br /><i><br />"Republicans are liars"<br /><br />In Logic... general propositions like this "they all liars" is meaningless and lead to tedious paradoxes.<br /></i><br /><br />Make it "<b>Most influential</b> Republicans are liars." We observe their behavior and their specific lies every day. I'll cop to there being a handful of exceptions. <br /><br /><i><br />But I know that attitude "they all unholy scum, we all white feather angels" damn too good, from all that religious types all around.<br /></i><br /><br />That's you reading "we all white feather angels" into it. I never said anything of the sort.<br /><br /><i><br />But in this case I will not be shy to admit that that way you are not constitute a viable oppopnent for me.<br /></i><br /><br />Good, because you're not worth my time either.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-8135474726883565072021-08-27T00:55:30.270-07:002021-08-27T00:55:30.270-07:00See, this is why I push the wager thing. Because t...See, this is why I push the wager thing. Because the entire confederate/Putinist/oligarchic putsch dep[ends absolutely upon undermining any sense of factual basis for reality... that assertions can be tested. Fact professions are the principal roadbloacks in the way of re-establishing feudalism.<br /><br /> And hence, they push this insane drivel that N.A. keeps doubling down with... "There is no fact! You and your opponents are just as right! You say it's daytime and your opponent says it's night... how can anyone tell for sure?"<br /><br />Now trhere are far lefties who do this, too! But thos postmodernist dingbats make up a fringe of the general progressive/science-using, pragmatic enlightenment side of this civil war. OTOH, I assert that nearly ALL Republicans are now so steeped in this dogma of subjectivity and hatred of fact professions, that it now qualifies as a cult.<br /><br />Thing is, at least Republicans have a glimmer of shame when you or I demand they step up, like men, and back up their blowhard lie-memes with cash. They understand that that is what men do. And it embarrasses them that their refusal exposes them as no-balls cowards.<br /><br />They flee.<br /><br />And this proves that "Native American" is nothing of the sort, because most men from that background understand the notion of honor and wagers. I've never known a First Nations person who did not.<br /><br />Naw, he is either what we've guessed... an agent provocateur doing 'sea-lioning"... or else a non-conservative member of the cult who sincerely is incapable of grasping what honotr or manhood have to do with anything.<br /><br />Okay fella. Again. Facts exist. There are professions that use them to pierce the shadows of Plato's Cave. And that clearly terrifies you.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-12241224872662117882021-08-27T00:32:04.141-07:002021-08-27T00:32:04.141-07:00Here's how to short-circuit Platonism, paradox...Here's how to short-circuit Platonism, paradox style:<br /><br />Some of Plato's Forms are examples of themselves, and some are not. The Form of all forms is a form, but the Form of all tables is not a table. Now consider the Form of all forms, and only those forms, that are not examples of themselves. Call that Russell's Form R. For any Form F, F is an example of R equals F is not an example of F. Is R an example of itself? It is as much as it is not!Paradoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821968120388981470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-26169324218592788102021-08-27T00:19:18.038-07:002021-08-27T00:19:18.038-07:00D.Brin
I invite NA to negotiate major wager stake...D.Brin<br /><br />I invite NA to negotiate major wager stakes on that.<br /><br /><br />Damn it, that my curiosity. But.<br />What exactly stakes do you mean?<br />And why you think I might be interestred?<br /><br />I would be more glad to discuss that double-bind AI problem.<br />Or different and all types of biases that bewitching our mind.<br />Or some other such things... glimmer of which attract people like me, scidata and paradoctor to come here.<br /><br />But it seems like it's just pyrite. "Gold of the fools" sparks, still.<br />So, maybe I am really that simpleton deserving dire punisment.<br />Who knows.Native Americannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11310697362170177892021-08-27T00:01:50.583-07:002021-08-27T00:01:50.583-07:00Paradoctor
How does a double-blind Turing test w...Paradoctor<br /><br /><br />How does a double-blind Turing test work? You don't know if it's a bot or a human and you don't know if you're a bot or a human? That's Twilight Zone material!<br /><br />I guess. (if I understand that double-*bind* idea correctly)<br />It means - if you'll set that tested AI in controversial disposition results should be - it'll squirms and will try to escape such predicaments.<br /><br /><br />But my favorite was Diogenes.<br /><br />Seems like we even closer. In our self-identification for at least.<br />Bite your fellows, yep.<br /><br /><br />You know those science-fiction stories about critters whose minds are weird, irrational, and incomprehensible, yet mysteriously fit for their alien environment? That's AI's view of us.<br /><br />Have you read Stanislav Lem's Golem XIV?<br />Native Americannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36043587998255067942021-08-26T23:58:49.774-07:002021-08-26T23:58:49.774-07:00L.Hart
""Not a troll, I agree, but som...L.Hart<br /><br /><br />""Not a troll, I agree, but somewhat of a sealion. I am not going to spend an inordinate amount of time on conversations of this form:<br /><br />"Republicans are liars"<br /><br />That's just your bias showing. They think you're the liar.""<br /><br /><br />In Logic... general propositions like this "they all liars" is meaningless and lead to tedious paradoxes.<br />That's all.<br />But I know that attitude "they all unholy scum, we all white feather angels" damn too good, from all that religious types all around.<br />Wanna be religious zealot? Wanna trash your mind with poor judgment and refusal to refine own understanding?<br />That's free country for you.<br />But in this case I will not be shy to admit that that way you are not constitute a viable oppopnent for me.<br />And can be only a pillow for my pins.<br /><br /><br />D.Brin<br /><br /><br />Rank Choice has been studied relentlessly and tested all over the world. While computers can be hacked, paper ballots can be audited, which is why Republicans try to avoid them.<br /><br /><br />All that thing called Elections are about Taking Power.<br />The same as with commercial ads - it's all about forcing you to BUY.<br />In both this case True Motives every and each time differ from what is said loudly. I thought that basic politological wisdom is self-evident. At least in this community.<br />So, why you await honest behavior from sides that have such conflicting motivations, I don't know?<br />Well, you derailed discussion from "voting mechanism reforms" to our mundane "voting fraud" screeching. Why so? Isn't that is manipulation?<br />Whatever.<br /><br />Let's analyse it.<br /><br />Short-term problems: 1) Legitemacy. Any voting system is more veritable if it works for a long time. Traditions and all.<br />2) Turbulence. Newly constituted system need time for people to learn how to use it correctly.<br />3) Exploiting. More complex system has more ways to cheat with, or even to block its work.<br /><br />Long-term: 1) "Cheating" party will adapt to it. By changing their talking points or other approaches. Still, elections are not about counting "whom you likes", but about messages and promices given, isn't it?<br />2) "Cheating" party will be destroyed. But. Place will be taken by other forces, which would be better adapted for political competition under Ranked Choice voting system.<br />3) Tradition of "changing rules on the fly" can be established. Where every time losing side will argue that rules of voting need to be revised.<br /><br /><br />“I'm glad to meet yet one socratic fellow here.”<br />Not Socratic but Platonist. And Plato was one of the prime villains across 2500 years.<br /><br />Such extravagant claimes must be elaborated futher.<br />Cannot be taken as is.<br />Well, I still have not enough data to blame Paradoctor to be that bad, nasty, p-p-p... platonist.<br />Let's he say it.<br /><br /><br />I invite NA to negotiate major wager stakes on that. He will flee like all the other preening, supposedly "macho" non-men.<br /><br />And... why should I play YOUR games? What for?<br />Especially when you from get go so eager to decide, in my stead - what I must to bet on?<br />Isn't that is primitive setup for a "countryside fool" game?<br />Like when some newbie comes to a town, and becomes easy prey for a thug who proposing him easy-win gambling.<br /><br />Do you think I am such simpleton?<br /><br />Do you think it's good for your cause?<br /><br />Rethorical questions.<br /><br />My game is of Logic and Analysis.<br />Why you'd not play by that rules?<br />What's up? Are you Chicken?Native Americannoreply@blogger.com