01/12/03 - James Gilmour Writes and Writes Somemore:
Greetings James and list members,
I had written:
District STV has this added problem because there is no linkage between the
party proportionality in the district and the party proportionality in the
entire jurisdiction.
James wrote: This
12/30/02 - Alex, Irving still holds the Trump Card:
Dear Alex Small,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 I wrote:
Approval Voting is just fine for any meaningless election, but as the
election becomes more political we will find more voters bullet voting
and therein lies the trump card that Irving holds over
12/28/02 - Re: Multi member district methods:
Greetings Rick Dietz,
Allow me to walk you through possible options for your three seat election.
* Limited Voting is your first improvement over Plurality-at-Large. The
voter is only given a number of votes equal to a simple majority of the
total
12/27/02 - Northern Ireland Assembly:
Dear James Gilmour,
Thank you for posting imformation about the Northern Ireland Asssembly. I
prefer to discuss information from real elections. There are too many
concocted elections presented on this list.
You wrote: Northern Ireland Assembly
12/23/02 - Comments on Mikeo's list of Best Methods:
Greetings list members,
Mikeo wrote:
From: MIKE OSSIPOFF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Best Method In Use
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 06:15:45 +
I only know of 3 single-winner methods that are used in public
12/19/02 - Ballots from an Approval election:
Greetings list members,
The great thinker, Tom Ruen, has kindly given me the ballots from an
election he conducted last year. I share them with you, being as Approval
ballots are hard to come by.
You Condorcet people will not be able to work the
12/19/02 - More Thoughts on Approval and IRV by Tom Ruen:
Tom Ruen wrote:
Requoted:
I say for me there is no fundamental flaw of power of Approval or Ratings
in terms of unequal power. The failure of Approval for me is that it
demands more thought from voters. I support IRV over Approval because
12/18/02 - Re: Best method in use?
Hi Mike,
Donald here, the best methods in use around the world today are as follows:
Single-Seat elections:
First Best - Alternative Vote aka Irving aka IRV:
Second Best - Top Two Runoff (only valid for three candidates):
Multi-Seat elections:
12/16/02 - Re: Optimal methods for multimember elections:
Hi Doug,
The optimal method may not be a method that you can sell to your contact
pushing for districting nor to the public. What I am going to do here is
to present a series of stages, each an improvement over the one before. It
will
]
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 12/12/02 - Clarification needed on `overvote':
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:18:02 -0600
Hi Donald,
I took the term overvote from a plurality election to mean there was more
votes cast than seats, and the vote is considered spoiled and not counted. I
12/12/02 - Giving `crutches to weak candidates':
Greetings Alex and EM list members,
Alex, you wrote: Healthy competition does NOT include giving crutches to
weak candidates...
This is something we agree on, but if you truly believe this, then why are
you supporting Condorcet and/or Approval
12/09/02 - Betrayal of the IRV voters by the Charlatans:
Greetings James Gilmour and list members,
James, you wrote: No matter how many times ballot papers are recounted
under the IRV rules I have used for many years, you will always obtain the
same result. So there should be nothing haphazard
11/08/02 - RE: [EM] Need IRV examples - Voting Show:
Greetings List members,
James of course is correct, but why isn't that obvious to anyone else?
James is like a breath of fresh air. (this list needs a breath of fresh air).
I find it amusing when these cult members expose themselves. The
11/05/02 - Tom, Help has Arrived:
Hi Tom,
Donald here, I support Irving, aka IRV, and as far as I know I am the only
one on this list that does, so you see this list is sort of a `backwater of
electoral reform'.
I've been on this list for more than five years studying the different
single seat
09/21/02 - Correction to: The Manipulation Test:
Greetings all,
Seems like I ended up with a `double negative' in my post of 9/20/02.
I wrote: It's not my problem if no one on a list will not reply to some of
your posts, welcome to the club.
Of course, the second `not' should not be there,
09/20/02 - The Manipulation Test:
-- Forwarded Letter and Comments
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 04:06:43 EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike Saari wrote: I still have seen no resolution to a very simple question.
Dear Mike,
I recall that you did present
06/29/02 - The True Majority Ghost:
Alex, you wrote: At the risk of misrepresenting Mr. Hager's intent, I
think I can elucidate from his post what he meant by true majority
winner.
Donald: Go ahead, give it a shot, be a risk taker.
[Hager wrote:]
The advantage of AV over other systems is
true majority winner.
___
Re: http://www.mail-archive.com/election-methods-list@eskimo.com/msg08093.html
From: Donald E Davison
Subject: [EM] 06/21/02 - `Majority' is not a valid word on the EM list:
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 02:53:22 -0700
You[r] position saying that the true majority
06/16/02 - Let's `Sort-Out' the Candidates:
Dear Mike,
You wrote: Here's a puzzle question. How can a group of 20-50 people make
collective decisions on various subjects - WITHOUT the use of a chairperson
(benevolent dictator) to control the meeting, decide when is the right
time to call for a
Forwarded Letter
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:58:21 EDT
Subject: Re: 06/08/02 - Sixty Percent is Considered a Landslide:
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 6/9/02 2:42:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
06/08/02 -
] (Donald E Davison)
Subject: 06/08/02 - Sixty Percent is Considered a Landslide:
Dear Mike,
Thank you for writing - (I think?).
If I understand you correctly, you would discard the following single-seat
election methods: Plurality, IRVing, Condorcet, and Bucklin, all
methods which regards any
Mike Ossipoff,
How is the Good Fight going against Irving and his Irvies???
Will you and your posse be able to `Head them off at the Pass'??
Ha Ha
Don
Forwarded Letter
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0047/solomon.shtml
Florida Fiasco Puts Radical Reforms on the Table
Taking Back the Vote
by Alisa Solomon
"Every vote counts!" the demonstrators chant, over and over, at
rallies from New York to Fresno, from
Forwarded Letter
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:02:26 -0500
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Barbara Bode [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: FWD: Letter from Florida
An Open Letter from Florida to the rest of the country:
OK, here's the deal.
We here in Florida
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-21-00
Dear MikeO,
Good news, there is only one John Gear.
Were you worried?
Me worry? Me no worry.
Donald,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-20-00
Hello Don,
This is John Gear, *formerly* of Washington State, now living in Lansing
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-20-00
Greetings MikeO,
I received the following post on another list.
Please notice the person who forwarded the post is John Gear.
Is this our John Gear - the John Gear of Washington state?
Have you been in touch with him since
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-17-00
Dear Markus Schulze and list
Please, someone give us the email address of Dan Johnson-Weinberger.
I want to speak to that man.
I'll give him a piece of my mind.
Thank you, Donald Davison
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-16-00
Dear Blake Cretney and the EM list,
It is possible to divide the seats according to the party quotas and
it is also possible to divide the seats according to the quotas of votes
cast in each district.
But, the two divisions
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-16-00
Dear Blake Cretney and List,
Exhausted votes and wasted votes are two different types of votes.
Exhausted votes happen when there is not enough choices made by the voters.
Wasted votes are caused by the design of
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-09-00
Dear Craig Layton,
You wrote: I don't see the justification for this[Districts Within Districts].
The justification is that now we have a better system than District
Hare Clarke or MMP.
Districts Within Districts(DWD) is
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 11-06-00
Greetings List,
I am now using the term Hare Voting to mean STV less its negative design
features. There is just too much misunderstanding otherwise.
And, I would like to propose a plan in which to use Hare Voting in
elections
--- Forwarded Letter ---
From: TODD Stephen
To: "'Donald E Davison'" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Reducing SNTV seats by more than one
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:56:01
Dear Donald--
In your message to me last Monday (your time), you said, " As of now, I
do not s
Greetings list,
Craig Carey wrote: "If the voters are going to be allowed to reduce the
number of winners, then why can they only reduce the number of winners by
one?"
Dear Craig,
The voters are able to reduce the seats by more than one in the
methods in which they have more than one vote,
Dear Demorep, 12/29/99
At one time I carried a PR methods on my Web Site that I called
Candidate List. I presented it in the context of two other list methods:
1) Voter List (using STV)
2) Candidate List (also using STV)
3) Party List
Greetings list members, 12/14/99
On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Dana Gourley wrote:
"Hello Donald
I don't know how most people on this list feel, but I feel PR is a
means to an end (ie. to empower the voters)."
Dear Dana Gourley,
PR is a necessary improvement in
Greetings EM list members,
STV and MMP are not too complicated. The insides of your video recorder
are too complicated for most, but we do not need to understand the inside
in order to enjoy its function, as long as it does the job it was designed
to do. That's the main point.
That is
Greetings,
It is wrong to make false claims for any proposed reform.
Some election reform people make false claims for Proportional
Representation(PR) methods. When these claims are not realized, enough
people will be willing to remove their support of the PR method so that the
method
Greetings EM list,
Craig Carey asked about someone from the Freedom Party to comment on MMP.
The following letter is about MMP and by Bill Frampton, Vice President
of the Freedom Party.
Enjoy,
Donald,
- Forwarded Letter -
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL
Greetings, 12/01/99
I do not write much about recall because it is not easy to fit it
into an election method. At times I find I must make changes to the method
in order to fit in recall, I do not like to do that.
In MMP the mechanics of
Forwarded Letter ---
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 06:00:24 -0700
From: Stan Price
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: An improvement in representative democracy
Donald Davison,
Your idea of keeping the members of Congress (in Canada, the members
of Parliament
Greetings to EM list members,
A person by the name of Bill Frampton wrote; "No system based on
single-member ridings -- and this includes MMP -- can make politicians
accountable to the voters."
Donald's comments:
Bill's statement is correct as far as it goes, but a more complete
statement
Forwarded Update
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 12:43:47 -0500
From: Rob Richie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Flash: John Anderson for President?
Sender: Rob Richie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11/19/99
To: Center for Voting and Democracy
Fr: Rob Richie, CVD
Greetings,
David Catchpole wrote: "That's Droop with the addition of districts-
remember that Hare can do the same!"
Dear David,
You are in error, as usual. It is not Hare that can do the same, it is
the exhausted ballots that can cause candidates to be elected with less
than a quota in
Greetings, 11/19/99
During any `Droop War' I have always tried to present my side of the
issue based on logic, fainess, honesty, and that which is mathematically
correct.
Proportional is mathematically correct when the members are elected by
equal parts of
in proportional representation.
Regards, Donald
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: Paul Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 01:10:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Droop quota role in STV's electing most prefered candidates.
{ snip
Greetings,
On 11/03/99 Markus Schulze wrote:
"I am surprised about the sudden change of your opinion about STV. A few
days ago you were an enthusiastic supporter of STV and now you say that STV
has "flaws" and is "corrupted" and "not proportional." What has caused this
change of your opinion?"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: List Owner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ER] The elections-reform maillist has moved.
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 11:33:11 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Loop: 70802
Hi,
The host for our elections-reform maillist is now topica.com, not IGC.
My understanding was
Greetings,
The following is an example of a 48% group electing a majority of the
Droop members.
* 100 members are to be elected in 25 districts - 4 member districts.
* 1000 voters per district - 25,000 total votes in election.
* Droop Quota is 200 (1000/5)
* The 48% group has 12,000
Greetings,
Richard Lung wrote:
From one member being elected on over half the votes, two members
are each elected on over a third the votes, three members on over one-
quarter the votes, etc, in larger constituencies.
Dear Richard Lung,
I wish to thank you for a very important reason.
Forwarded Letter ---
From: "Will Arnold" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 10:36:00 -0700
Subject: RE: political change
A few years ago I heard someone on NPR relate how they thought
if we moved the decision makers out of Washington D.C. and held
legislative sessions
Forwarded Letter
From: "Nat Lerner" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fw: Seeking the best of all PR systems: GSTV, STV+,STV(+), STV(x2)
and GSTV(LB)
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 20:58:59 -0700
Dear Donald
I enjoy your critques against STV even if some of
Greetings, 10/30/99
Markus Schulze wrote:
"To my opinion, the example above questions whether
STV with the Hare Quota is really proportional." [copy below]
Dear Markus Schulze,
Hare STV can be proportional to the final results, but no STV election
Greetings,
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Donald E Davison wrote:
There are people who support small district STV and/or Droop Quota
and/or exhausted ballots being given to the remaining candidates. These
three features make STV less proportional. One or more of them would not
allow the Eight
Greetings,
David Catchpole wrote: Mon 25 Oct 1999
Well- Simply consider MMP, only using STV (with an option to the voter of
a full list of candidates or a list of parties for the at-large election)
rather than FPTP and list apportionment. Where there are n electorate
members, there
Greetings,
David Catchpole wrote: "The equal portions of total votes is Droop quota."
Dear David Catchpole,
Your remark makes me wonder if we have the same or different math for
the Droop Quota. The Droop that I know will add one in the divisor to `n',
the number of seats, and then add
Greetings,
Craig Carey wrote:
STV is just the STV method isn't it. It is not all that proportional.
Dear Craig: Yes, I agree with you.
Craig: The lower the 'quota for winners', the more proportional STV would be(?).
Donald: No, the lower the quota, the less proportional STV will be. Are you
Greetings,
STV is suppose to be a method of Proportional Representation(PR),
which the dictionary defines as: "an electoral system designed to represent
in a legislative body each political group or party in proportion to its
actual voting strength in the electorate."
I can say the same
Greetings,
Demorep wrote:
D- Both the Hare and Droop methods and Mr. Davidson's comments are defective
due to the fixation of having 1 vote per seat in a legislative body.
Dear Demorep,
I agree with you. I would like for members to have more votes, but not
by way of proxy voting, unless
Greetings,
There is some misunderstanding as to what exactly is a wasted vote in
a STV election. So, the questions I will answer are: What is a wasted vote
and what is not a wasted vote.
A wasted vote is a vote that does not end up on one or another of the
winning candidates.
Greetings,
Proportional means equal portions of the whole.
One truism of Proportional Representation is that members are to be
elected by equal portions of total votes.
Which means that when we reduce the candidates down to the elected
members, their vote sums are to be near equal
Greetings,
An election is not over until we have eliminated all the candidates
down to the number of seats. While it is true that the elimination of the
last candidate cannot change the elected candidates, we need to know how
many of the last transferred ballots will become wasted. We need
Greetings,
I was thinking that this action of a group lowering the number of
votes they place on each of their candidates should also been happening in
election methods like Single Non-Transferable Vote(SNTV) and Bottoms
Up(Alternative Vote when used to elect multi members).
Has
Greetings,
Bart wrote:
I have a problem with this statement:
It is best to use Ideal Conditions when we compare the two.
Does this mean that worst-case conditions are irrelevant? -Bart
Dear Bart,
You are correct, I should have included exhausted ballots.
The number of exhausted
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - My 10/16/99 Letter
Greetings,
`Lowering the Numbers' is a major flaw of the Single Transferable
Vote(STV) election method.
Soon after STV was first put into use, the people realized that there
was a lower number of votes, than the Hare Quota,
Forwarded Letter ---
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald E Davison)
From: John Lowry
Subject: Re: Direct Democracy via Judges and/or Juries
Donald,
"Judicature" is not my idea. It is just the best such "replac
Greetings,
Robert Winters, who is active in a Preference Voting city, said:
"You will generally always find PR advocates who want to push for
"their party" or "their interest" favoring Droop.
BI feel that a true, unbiased proportionalist should favor the Hare
Quota./B
Living
Greetings,
I would like to add to this Droop discussion by saying what is exactly
wrong with the Droop Quota.
When we have a candidate with a surplus of votes, most of that surplus
will be transferred to a second candidate of the same party.
Now, if some creative mathematics can
: Please let me have your thoughts in due course. Regards, Steve
Donald: Yes, I will let you have my thoughts about your Meek-Style STV,
if and when I understand its rules. Regards, Donald
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: TODD Stephen
To: "'Donald E Davison'" [EMAIL
- - - - - - - - 10/05/99
From: "Wayne Hall"
To: "Donald E Davison" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Democracy
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 13:09:45 +0300
O.K. here is my single page:
For some years I have participated in a direct democracy discussion group in
Athens, Greece. On the stre
Greetings,
What do you think about laws being made only by trial judges and/or
juries??
Would you consider that to be Direct Democracy?
I recived the following letter on this subject:
Forwarded Letter ---
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1999 10:03:23 -0700
To: [EMAIL
Greetings list,
In the following letter, Bart Ingles is
commenting on some text from my web site at:
http://www.mich.com/~donald/reassign2.html
Donald
Forwarded Letter ---
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 23:06:27 -0700
From: Bart Ingles
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Ladder
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - October 06 1999
Greetings,
Stephen Todd sent me some comments concerning the North Ireland STV rules.
Dear Steve,
I gave your comments due consideration and decided that you are
failing to understand the math of the Northern Ireland
Greetings,
This update from New Democracy contains the following:
1) 13 Tips for Activists:
2) Pure Democracy, Direct Democracy, and my Ten Levels of Government
3) Humor - Technology for Country Folk:
Donald,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1) 13 Tips for
Dear Markus,
Thank you for the information about Cork.
11 percent is about the same percentage the Cambridge, Mass elections
get in exhausted votes, or as you say: "Non-Transferable".
Donald,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dear Donald,
Enid Lakeman wrote ("How
Dear David,
I went to the site of the address that you gave in your post.
The information I seek is the Final Count.
Green talks of the Final Count, which I assume is in his Full Report.
But, his Full Report requires software that I do not have.
Anyway, thank you for
://www.nsw.gov.au . An example- Sydney City Council, a
geographically small (well, at least compared to Brisbane) inner-city
authority, has more than one hundred candidates.
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Donald E Davison wrote:
odd ---
From: Stephen Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "'Donald E Davison'" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DD queries
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 10:12:06 +1200
Hi Donald-
Would you please give me your thoughts on what constitutes a conclusive
majority? The point about a near majority not ha
--- Forwarded Letter ---July 26 1999
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 11:23:46 -0400
From: Jim Weaver
Organization: GCES
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Government and Industry
G O V E R N M E N T A N D I N D U S T R Y
In February at the PASA Conference William
Forwarded Letter -
From: MIKE OSSIPOFF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RWE Bucklin strategy. 3 candidates.
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 18:59:11 PDT
Don--
Two points regarding your reply to Tannenwald:
1. RWE
Greetings,
Ron Tannenwald wrote: "...eventually, though, something has to be done to
prevent a reoccurence of strategic truncation." Cordially, Ronald
Tannenwald
Dear Ronald Tannenwald,
You should consider Run-Off Without Elimination(RWE). It is like
Bucklin in that next choices are
Greetings,
Ron Tannenwald wrote:
To justify my choice of a voting procedure let me set forth some
criteria I feel are necessities.
1.Majority Criteria (i.e. if a candidate is the first choice of a
majority, that candidate wins)
2.The winner must have the approval of a majority of
Greetings,
Salva wrote:
the difference you express are not in percentages, but in percentage points
(a party that has 10%votes and 20%seats has a difference of 10 points, but a
difference in percentage of 100%)
Dear Salva,
I will agree that a party with 10 % votes and 20 % seats has 100
Greetings,
Bart wrote about Vermont's Two Member Distsricts:
"It's hard to believe that Plurality-At-Large could produce those
results. I wonder how?"
Dear Bart,
The answer to your question is the swing voters.
In a Plurality-at-Large election, if a party has fifty percent
- Forwarded Letter
From: Richard Foy
To: James Ogle, Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 19:04:19 -0800
Organization: ACLU, AI, UDC, VFP
Subject: Vermont's Two Member Districts (fwd)
Hi James,
This message from Donald on multiseat districts
Greetings,
Tom Round wrote:
Sorry if I have missed an answer already given, but ... What particular
voting system does Vermont use in the 2-seat districts? Block vote (ie, 2
x's), or a single non-transferable vote, or some form of PR? Tom.
Dear Tom Round,
The voters are allowed two
+0200
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donald E Davison)
From: Richard Matland
Subject: Re: Vermont's Two Member Districts
Hello Donald,
Prince Edward Island, a province in Canada, also used two member districts
for almost 100 years until the start of the 1990s. Initially they had two
member districts
Greetings,
I have math corrections for my Vermont letter.
The corrections are in [brackets].
S I N G L E S E A T D I S T R I C T S
Party Votes Percent Members electedPercent + or -
- - --- ------
Greetings,
In April I asked the question: "What is the smallest change that will
yield the most improvement in an election method - for the size of the
change?"
When I suggested that a two member district in place of the Single
Seat District would yield the most improvement for the
Greetings EM List,
Salva wrote:
Im not sure to understand Salva Count. Could you give an example please.
Thank you
(If I understand it I may try to put it against the criteriums, as I soon
will do with Salva Voting and I will post the results)
Salva
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Greetings,
At the web site: http://bcn.boulder.co.us/government/approvalvote/altvote.html
Steven Brams and Peter Fishburn wrote:
"Like STV, the Borda count need not elect the Condorcet candidate.
This is illustrated by the case of three voters with preference order abc
and two voters with
Dear Blake Cretney,
I stand corrected. And, I wish to thank you for pointing out this
needed correction. You have been most helpful.
I am more than willing to embrace this corrected defination of
Approval Voting(AV).
One question: Does the definaion also apply to Borda Count??
--- Forwarded Letter by Blake --
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Blake Cretney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Criticism of ABC methods page
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:54:35 +
Blake wrote:
I have drawn up some comments about the "A-B-C" methods secti
Greetings List,
Salva wrote: "Can somebody tell some advantage Salva has over Borda or some
disadvantage Borda has and Salva Doesn't?"
Dear Salva,
One advantage Borda Count has over Approval Voting is that it
discounts the lower choices.
Two advantages that Salva Voting has over
Dear Salva and Paul,
Blake Cretney [EMAIL PROTECTED] maintains a fairly good
dictionary of terms on his site at:
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/harrow/124/
Donald
gineer
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - third letter - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 12:28:42 -0600
From: Paul Dumais [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: AMC
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] FWD: Borda Count by Paul Dumais
Donald E Davison wrote: [correction
Greetings list,
FYI: I have asked Salva to consider joining the EM list.
I have also asked Paul Dumais, the Borda Count guy, to also join
the EM list.
Donald
Greetings list,
Ronald Tannenwald wrote:
Dear Donald,
Thank you for explaining the Salva method.I don't agree with the assertion
that one's lower alternates cannot contribute to the defeat of one's preferred
candidate.Consider the following:
49% 3% 23% 25%
_
---Forwarded letter -
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:22:44 -0600
From: Paul Dumais [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: AMC
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Donald E Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Salva Voting - multi-seat example
Hi,
In response
--- Forwarded Letter ---
From: Salva
To: "Donald E Davison" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Salva Voting - multi-seat example
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 02:19:35 +0200
I suggest that you ask Mr. Salva to give you a complete example of his
proposed method with at least 3
Dear Ronald Tannenwald,
Thank you for chiming in.
As I understand the Salva method, I think candidate B is to be the
Salva Voting winner of your example.
If a candidate loses the lead position then different candidates are
to have choice/votes transferred in the next cycle of
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
