Not that CES.

The Center for Election Science posted a 2012 End-of-Year Review worth reading.

My favorites from 2012

• I love the social media activism from the CES representatives I know, and I enjoy observing them spread information to newbies such as myself. Keep it up!
• Being granted 501(c)3 status is a major accomplishment.
• The renovated web site looks clean and professional. I can now direct people I encounter who are open to thinking about election methodology without a tinge of embarrassment.
• The articles by Eric Sanders in Big Think were fantastic.
• Overall, the content of the web site is of very high quality. Your staff deserves a lot of credit!

What I'd like more of in 2013

• Web-based interactive demonstrations and tools to quickly drive home the simplicity and appeal of score voting.
• Increased reach to laypeople. Current materials are necessarily in-depth and scientific, but now that the in-depth content is established, perhaps more authoring effort can be allocated to easily-digested material. I suspect this is already underway as the most recent content I've seen is more accessible. This is why I like the Eric Sanders articles as much as I do; the content is accessible to those who have not already studied elections.
• Consistency of message. CES should coalesce its activism into Score Voting (or Approval Voting) with a very specific set of details. The scientific background can explain that CES members would be satisfied with either (if that's true) but a single ideal should be clear to outsiders.
• A little more tolerance for the other folks out there seeking election reform, even if in forms that are not as sound. I have cringed when I've seen fiercely-worded differences of opinion about nuances of election science flare up on Twitter. If someone is immovable, skip them, move on, and attempt to convince someone who is more open-minded.