[EM] 03/01/03 - Another error in Craig's argument:

03/01/03 - Another error in Craig's argument: Craig wrote: I found the mistake in my argument that the Vermont method is monotonic. That argument appeared in my Politicians and Polytopes mailing list. The error occurs in the line (A wins) = (Hb Ha). Donald here, yes, I seen that. The line

[EM] 01/21/03 - Re: Wasted votes and quotas:

01/21/03 - Re: Wasted votes and quotas: Greetings Doug and list members, Doug, you wrote: The definition of wasted that I had in mind when I was writing my piece on quotas was the votes that remained with the runner-up after all seats in an election had been filled. (Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003)

[EM] 01/18/03 - Markus on Parties and Candidates in any mix:

01/18/03 - Markus on Parties and Candidates in any mix: Dear Markus and list members, Markus, you wrote on Sun, 12 Jan 2003: From: Markus Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [EM] Markus Schulze Wrote and Wrote Again: Dear Donald, you wrote (12 Jan 2003): Donald: You should accept this

[EM] 01/17/03 - No Problem, Olli:

01/17/03 - No Problem, Olli: Greetings Olli and list members, Olli, you wrote: I can see nothing that could be excluded. Donald here: Then I shall explain for you that which `could be excluded'. In your example of three seats and three candidates with one-third each, that which is excluded are

[EM] 01/16/03 - Hey James, Droop Quota is an Oxymoron:

01/16/03 - Hey James, Droop Quota is an Oxymoron: Greetings James and list members. James, you wrote: These [Donald's] comments seem to be based on a misunderstanding of the purpose of elections, on a misunderstanding of the purpose of the Droop quota, and on a misunderstanding of the arithmetic

[EM] 01/15/03 - James' reply to my `Northern Ireland Assembly' Letter:

01/15/03 - James' reply to my `Northern Ireland Assembly' Letter: Dear James and list members, James, you wrote: You may not be advocating one area elections, but you are quite clearly advocating two other features of voting systems that have profound political effects, ie near 100% party

Re: Markus Schulze Wrote and Wrote Again:

Greetings Markus and list members, Dear Markus, you wrote: The aim of proportional representation is to minimize the number of wasted votes. However, proportionality is not the only criterion for a good multi-winner method. Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002, Donald here: I will agree that

[EM] 01/05/03 - Two Replies for Olli:

01/05/03 - Two Replies for Olli: Dear Olli, First I have a clarificaion. In my last post on the subject of SNTV, I should have stated that the votes of an eliminated lowest candidate would not also be eliminated. The votes would stay in the count of the total party votes. This is why my

[EM] 01/05/03 - Olli Salmi and d'Hondt:

01/05/03 - Olli Salmi and d'Hondt: --- Olli's Letter Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 16:47:55 +0200 (EET) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Olli Salmi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [EM] Davison-SNTV At 20:17 - 28.12.2002, Donald E Davison wrote: * Davison-SNTV is your next method of

[EM] 05/21/02 - FWD Math for those who want more Math:

PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:23:30 +1200 To: Mike Ossipoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Craig Carey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Archery of Mr Ossipoff: missing IRV always Cc: Donald Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 That burying problems of where this happens: [1] added paper = 1

[EM] 05/23/02 - Single-Seat Cumulative is not FPTP:

by all these lessons. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election Methods +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N

[EM] 05/20/02 - What `is' is (a la Clinton):

05/20/02 - What `is' is (a la Clinton): Greetings list members, Richard Moore wrote: Condorcet winner is unambiguous. Poor Richard cannot say this is true until he first gives us a `rigorous definition' of what `is' is (a la Clinton). He should also give us a rigorous definition of the word

[EM] 05/20/02 - True Majority Winner or Candidate:

candidate is the `true majority candidate' so we can compare our results when we do decide on which method to use? This has always puzzled me, how do you know this before you work the math of some method? Please reply. Regards to all, Donald Davison, PS, I include a copy of Hager's 4/22/02

[EM] 05/15/02 - The Senate expects its `Pound of Pork Flesh':

systems. The corruption of a representative lies in the power of the vote that he wields. If this power is given to a committee in his home district then there should be less corruption - Just a thought. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald

[EM] 05/14/02 - Two plus Two correction:

not, one of our resident `Super Great' math junkies should be able to elighten us, if for a moment they would be willing to take their head out of the garbage dump of lower choices. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate

[EM] 05/13/02 - The Education of Poor Richard:

, Donald Poor Richard's Original Letter Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 10:55:38 -0700 From: Richard Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [EM] aka [Junk Election Methods] 05/05/02 - Condorcet just does not make the cut: Donald Davison wrote: 05/05/02

[EM] aka [Junk Election Methods] 05/05/02 - FWD Math Background:

05/05/02 - FWD Math Background: Forwarded Letter - From: Narins, Josh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Donald Davison' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [EM] 05/02/02 - The So Called Compromise Candidate: Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 16:16:18 -0400 Mr. Davison, What sort

[EM] [Junk Election Methods] 05/03/02 - The Lower Choices are Mostly Junk:

around in a swamp at night with their heads in the air inhaling swamp-gas. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election Methods

[EM] 05/02/02 - The So Called Compromise Candidate:

because the Junk Methods will at times elect your unelectable favorite for you, but it's still corruption. I call Approval Voting, Borda, and Condorcet the Junk Methods because these are methods that allow a voter's lower choices to harm an earlier choice, that is a no no. Regards, Donald Davison

[EM] 04/27/02 - Junk Election Methods vs The Allure of IRVing:

has a better understanding of election methods and mathematics than you. You would be wise to pay attention to what she has to say. She's one smart cookie. Junk Election Methods vs The Allure of IRVing and the winner is IRVing. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http

[EM] 04/24/02 - FWD Letters of Stéphane:

04/24/02 - FWD Letters of Stéphane: Greetings EM list, Donald here, Stéphane has asked me to forward his 4/19 Summary letter to the EM list. He sent two letter on 4/19, so, I'm going to send both in the event neither one was received by the EM list. Stéphane wrote on 4/22/02: Could you please

[EM] 04/22/02 - Stéphane's poll is Hilarious:

, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election Methods +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N | | Democracy is a beautiful

[EM] 04/16/02 - Best to use email to register:

04/16/02 - Best to use email to register: Mike, I too had trouble with the website, until I found the email address to register. Best to use the following email address to register: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send blank email, nothing on the subject line, nothing in the body. See you on the other

[EM] 04/14/02 - Partisan and Non-Partisan:

with local issues, if at all. Anyway, the distinction needs to be made between partisan and non-partisan because some election methods are only suited for partisan elections. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election

[EM] 04/12/02 - Favorite is the Approval Winner:

) So, to answer the question: When is Mr Ossipoff's favorite not a winner? Answer: When some method other than Approval Voting is the method being used in an election. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election

[EM] 04/12/02 - Re: Action - Rouillon's contest

Presidential Election Plan: by Donald Davison - January 15 2001 Draft: It is possible to use Instant Runoff Voting aka IRVing in one or more or all the states without the elimination of the Electoral College. This Plan keeps the Electoral College, but weds it to IRVing in the states. Each state would use

[EM] 04/11/02 - Reply to `Cambridge Mass. example':

,KUR)01,02,07,15,16 034,CYR-0333,MCS)01,19,07,09 034,CYR-0334,KUR)01,02,19,09,07,18,15,14,03,04,05,06,10,11,13,12,08,16,17 034,CYR-0335,JON)01,19,07,02,07,09,12 Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald Candidate Election Methods

[EM] 04/10/02 - Reply to Stéphane:

in any mix. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N | | Democracy is a beautiful thing

[EM] 04/06/02 - Meek and Droop can be eliminated:

04/06/02 - Meek and Droop can be eliminated: Mr. Stéphane Rouillon, Meek is the policy of adjusting the quota downwards after every transfer of ballots in order to allow for the loss of exhausted ballots. I claim this Meek policy is not necessary because the Droop quota has already lowered the

[EM] 04/05/02 - Monotonicity is `Much Ado About Nothing':

, non-monotonicity is `Much Ado About Nothing'. Regards, Donald Davison - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 15:19:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Cambridge Election 01,19,02 01,07,02,19,09,08,18,13,15 [31 total] 01,13

[EM] 04/05/02 - I Know the Drill, Adam, I'll be on the same page:

. Adam: What would you, Donald Davison, advise me and those like me to do? Donald: `Listen up troops, our first objective in this coming election is for our party to rise up and take over the Number Two Party position in this area, we can do it. For the first time, the polls are in favor of us doing

[EM] 04/03/02 - Mr Stéphane Rouillon wrote:

04/03/02 - Mr Stéphane Rouillon wrote: Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 01:25:55 -0500 1000: A,B 1000: A,C 1000: B,C 1000: B,A 1000: C,A 1000: C,B Maybe I am mistaken, but this example seems very realistic to me. Hi Stéphane, Donald here, you are mistaken. Your example has 6000 votes divided exactly

[EM] 04/03/02 - Cretney is not reading all his EM email:

04/03/02 - Cretney is not reading all his EM email: Greetings list, Cretney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First, this looks like a personal correspondence between Craig and Rob. Presumably Craig forwarded this to you... Davison here, Cretney, you presume wrong. I don't fault you for not reading

[EM] 04/04/02 - Rob LeGrand's Three way Tie:

? Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N | | Democracy is a beautiful thing

[EM] 04/04/02 - Stéphane wrote: I only prefer Hare quota...

average votes per candidate. This new rule is a major part of my new Preference Voting/STV election method, which I call Hare-Davison. Hare-Davison - A New STV Election Method: by Donald Davison This is my design of Preference Voting/STV. Hare-Davison has these differences from Preference Voting

[EM] 04/02/02 - We have No Evil of Non-Monotonicity:

Approval Voting the voters are damned if they do and they are damned if they don't. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N

[EM] 03/30/02 - Re: How to vote in Approval:

method lead to IRVing. Best to start with IRVing and not with Approval nor Borda nor Condorcet. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ |Q U O T A T I O N

[EM] 03/31/02 - `Craig has left the Building':

03/31/02 - `Craig has left the Building': Greetings list members, Craig wrote: I quit the Election Methods List at about Wednesday 27 Mar 2002 04:28 UTC. Craig has left the building. I suppose now MikeO will be unsubscribing, he won't want to miss any part of his schoolboy holiday with Craig.

[EM] 03/31/02 - Re: More on Gerrymandering Prevention:

is based on the seats and total votes of the Greater District. Districts Within Districts will give us the gerrymandering prevention ability of eight or more seats and the closer member-link of two-seat sub-districts. Regards, Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald

[EM] 03/29/02 - They're Going!! Mike and Craig are soon to be gone:

03/29/02 - They're Going!! Mike and Craig are soon to be gone: Craig Carey wrote: He. I am unsubscribing from the this list. I could reply to any replies, and perhaps even re-subscribe. Hi, Donald here, are you quoting Mike Ossipoff? Is he threatening to unsubscribe again? Those words look

[EM] 03/26/02 - Just think how bad Richie must feel:

pull your chain. Or at least, don't let on that your chain has been pulled. Craig was able to pull your chain and you reacted, but to your credit you did not stoop to name calling this time, good for you, there's hope for you yet. Donald Davison, Original Letter From

[EM] 02/12/02 - Approval Voting via Plurality-at-Large:

Approval Voting does not elect the choice of the people. [EMAIL PROTECTED], the demolition repo man, is EM's resident expert on the politics of Detroit. I refer you to him, if you want further details on this saga. (or possible corrections) Regards, Donald Davison, http

[EM] 02/12/02 - If a Frog had Wings he wouldn't bump his ass

02/12/02 Hi DemoRepoMan, My favorite `If' saying is: If a Frog had Wings he wouldn't bump his Ass Donald, Original Letter --- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 21:25:19 EST Subject: RE: 02/06/02 - Adam's 02/02 example of three equal candidates: To: [EMAIL

[EM] 02/09/02 - Approval favors certain candidates:

02/09/02 - Approval favors certain candidates: Dear Adam, You wrote: Perhaps it was best to let Mark's flippant response to your flippant post stand alone... Donald: I don't recall reading Mark's response to my post. I must not be getting all my email, or most likely I deleted his post my

[EM] 02/04/02 - Welcome to the Hare camp:

or friendly debate? Sincerely, Tom Ruen - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Tom, Welcome to the Hare camp. Your up coming board election will be more proportional with Hare. Regards, Donald Davison

[EM] 02/04/02 - Approval is only for Beauty Contests:

wins. Regards, Donald Davison

[EM] 02/03/02 - STV for Candidate Lists:

02/03/02 - STV for Candidate Lists: Dear Adam, You wrote: While it [Party List] is not quite as efficient in making every vote elect a representative as STV is, it is highly proportional, highly democratic, and extremely simple to implement and understand. Donald: While I agree to the good

[EM] 0/03/02 - FWD - [instantrunoff] IRV @ Carleton College!

0/03/02 - FWD - [instantrunoff] IRV @ Carleton College! --- Forwarded Letter - To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:42:09 -0600 Subject: [instantrunoff] IRV @ Carleton College! Here's a success story for IRV supporters.

[EM] 02/02/02 - Re: 01/31/02 - Two new design features for STV:

the fifty per cent number? What empirical study can you give us as a basis of such an assertion? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 02/02/02 - No, it is not what the party leaders want! by Donald Davison Dear Ren, You wrote: Dear Donald, You ask, What does the public

[EM] 02/01/02 - IRVing is superior in math, Steve Barney:

one election. IRVing is superior in math when the number of candidates are four or more. Regards, Donald Davison - Original Letter - Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:16:07 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Barney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Election_Methods-list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [EM

[EM] 01/31/02 - Two new design features for STV:

is that it will make it easy for a partisan STV election to allow the people to vote for candidates and/or parties in any mix. The averaging will always divide all votes equally between all the remaining candidates of a party without the need to split up any of the party votes. Regards, Donald Davison

[EM] 01/29/02 - Re: Electoral College Debate:

: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Instant Runoff Voting and the Electoral College: by Donald Davison - January 15 2001 Draft: It is possible to use Instant Runoff Voting aka IRVing in one or more or all the states without the elimination of the Electoral College. Each

[EM] 01/27/02 - Re: PR/STV Hybrid for multi-winner?

mix. Regards, Donald Davison - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Multi-Seat Election Methods: by Donald E Davison For Elections Conducted in a Single-Area Study Material for Political Change - Revised 11/01/00 The Ladder of Methods for the Election

[EM] OT - Humor:

Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:32:12 -0700 Subject: Fwd: Some new, some old, all humor A good pun is its own reword. Energizer Bunny arrested - charged with battery. A man's home is his castle, in a manor of speaking. A pessimist's blood type is always b-negative. My wife