Manoj said:
Ah, so now it is a matter of determining intent. So, short of
providing code for telepathically determining the voters intent, how
can one cater to people who really find A unacceptable, and are
voting honestly, from people who would consider A acceptable, but are
lying to give
Manoj:
I think I must be missing something major here (sorry:I've had
less than an average of 5 hours of sleep a night for the last 10 days
or so, and in my old age my faculties are failing me)
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 06:07:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Yes, you're missing something.
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 06:31:22PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Here's a generalized example:
* Q-1 (or fewer) of the voters vote C as the only acceptable option:
C = 1
D = 2 default
A = 3
B = 3
* Slightly less than one-half of the remaining voters vote like you.
* Slightly more
Anthony Towns said:
excellent analysis snipped
Fundamentally, what it requires is for very few people to express
full preferences. There're only two reasons for this: one is that most
people don't understand the issue, which isn't what happens in Debian;
Or at least if people don't understand the
On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 04:33:05PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 10:33:31AM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
Which makes D win, rather than A, B or C.
Unfortunately, that doesn't mean this is not the best strategy.
Sure it does: if their sincere preferences were A,B,C D
Andrew == Andrew Pimlott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew 3a. Due to the inherent meaning of the default option,
Andrew voters will typically not consider it especially
Andrew undesirable (unless they strongly feel that a revote will
Andrew create tension or damage Debian's
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 06:31:22PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
* Q-1 (or fewer) of the voters vote C as the only acceptable option:
[see below]
* Slightly less than one-half of the remaining voters vote
[ A=1, B=4, C= 2, D=2]
* Slightly more than one-half of the remaining voters
I guess you mean that if the vote defaults the issue is not resolved by
the vote.
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:53:42PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
My understanding is that a win by further discussion will
generally be followed shortly by another vote, and that when there's
a possibility to
Hi,
Folks, the miniumum discussion period for the Voting GR has
passed, but I am deferring calling for a vote until Tuesday. A family
emergency is taking me away from the keyboard for the weekend; and I
need to baby sit this vote. The recent rainbow vote testing has
discovered a bug
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:43:03PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
your favourite option up (from 0 to 0.5 in this example above), but they
also increase the odds of the default option getting up (again, from 0 to
0.5). That's a gamble, not a strategy.
Tell that to a gambler.
Gamblers do it
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:07:29PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
Eg, sincere:
9 ABD AB 12:8
6 BAD AD 15:5
3 DAB BD 15:5
2 DBA
B can swap and make DA 11:9, but in Condorcet/CpSSD A still wins.
I think this is related to the Strong Defensive Strategy
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 11:59:16PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Folks, the miniumum discussion period for the Voting GR has
passed, but I am deferring calling for a vote until Tuesday. A family
emergency is taking me away from the keyboard for the weekend; and I
need to
I guess you mean that if the vote defaults the issue is not resolved by
the vote.
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:53:42PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
My understanding is that a win by further discussion will
generally be followed shortly by another vote, and that when there's
a possibility to
Hi,
Folks, the miniumum discussion period for the Voting GR has
passed, but I am deferring calling for a vote until Tuesday. A family
emergency is taking me away from the keyboard for the weekend; and I
need to baby sit this vote. The recent rainbow vote testing has
discovered a bug
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:43:03PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
your favourite option up (from 0 to 0.5 in this example above), but they
also increase the odds of the default option getting up (again, from 0 to
0.5). That's a gamble, not a strategy.
Tell that to a gambler.
Gamblers do it
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:07:29PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
Eg, sincere:
9 ABD AB 12:8
6 BAD AD 15:5
3 DAB BD 15:5
2 DBA
B can swap and make DA 11:9, but in Condorcet/CpSSD A still wins.
I think this is related to the Strong Defensive Strategy
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 11:59:16PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Folks, the miniumum discussion period for the Voting GR has
passed, but I am deferring calling for a vote until Tuesday. A family
emergency is taking me away from the keyboard for the weekend; and I
need to
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 12:18:14AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:53:42PM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
My vexation is that I've convinced myself that if everyone is
rational and willing to vote strategically, then second-place
candidate will win, because its backers
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 03:29:57PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
I'm sorry, but I don't think it's reasonable to use the default option in
a traditional Condorcet variant. Selecting a result where the majority
would have preferred the vote to default instead of that winning is an
unacceptable
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 11:11:00AM -0400, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 03:29:57PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
I'm sorry, but I don't think it's reasonable to use the default option in
a traditional Condorcet variant. Selecting a result where the majority
would have
People like Gentoo because they can compile from source, right? They claim
they get major performance gains* and can tweak compile-time options. Nice
advantages.
* The amount of gain is up for debate, but I'm sure everyone agrees it makes it
faster.
We know you can get these advantages in
21 matches
Mail list logo
