Juho,
Juho wrote:
On Nov 2, 2006, at 1:29 , Kevin Venzke wrote:
Juho,
--- Juho [EMAIL PROTECTED] a crit :
Example 1. Large party voters consider C better than the other large
party candidate, but not much.
45: LCR
40: RCL
15: CL=R
Ranked Preferences elects L.
I am reposting this from my post at the rangevoting list (slightly
modified).
http://rangevoting.org/PropRep.html
"You want to get both best possible quality accountability and best
possible representation"
This is an interesting point. What about an assembly elected as follows:
The
Sorry about re-sending this. I forgot to change the title, and this
post has nothing to do with the previous title.
http://rangevoting.org/PropRep.html
"You want to get both best possible quality accountability and best
possible representation"
This is an interesting point.
Juho,
You mentioned strongest indicated preference gap as the approval
cut. How about defining it dynamically so that one would find the
strongest preference relation that still has non-eliminated
candidates at both sides of it? (like in RP)
CB: I did. Or if I didn't make it clear, I
