Blog Spectrum

Thanks again, TheCO, for having me. I know you were attempting to give me a compliment, and I do appreciate the sentiment behind it. However, I don't agree with the content. While I do have some unique viewpoints and have unswerving belief in some very basic philosophical principles, your characterization does not apply, in my opinion, to the assessments of voting systems I've posted on Blog Spectrum in the last week. As for 'unique viewpoint,' I am quite transparently towing the party line of some of the foremost critics of the EC slash proponents of direct voting (George C Edwards III, most frequently). I also am very interested in understanding valid arguments for the EC over direct voting, as you can see in my debate with Rahul on the subject on Hawken blog and rhetorique.us (I just haven't found in Sidial's posts), so it's not accurate to say I am unswerving in my belief in what I say - if I was, I would not see the value in having this debate in the first place. It's true that I am quite confident in the argument against the EC, but it's not airtight (and no one knows for sure that direct voting for president would be better until it is implemented and studied), and I wish to better understand things from the perspective of defenders/proponents of the EC. My loyalty is not--is never--to what I say at any cost; my loyalty is to rationalism and empiricism. So, again, thank you for offering the complement, but I'll pass on accepting it. I hope to be back for future debates, and good luck, everyone, with the blog!