I wrote and Markus responded,
Shwartz Sequential Dropping is better. The only
differences as far as I can tell are that
1) You only deal with the Smith Set
2) You consider number of voters in favor of the defeat, not the margin
of the defeat.
I don't understand this paragraph. Do you
On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Blake Cretney wrote:
Forest Simmons wrote:
Personal benefits add up to societal benefit if the voters are civic
minded enough to consider community benefits of personal worth. If their
attitude is every man for himself then community values will be short
changed
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Richard Moore wrote:
Forest Simmons wrote:
That still leaves open at least two important questions.
(1) How do we ascertain voter utilities accurately? The uncertainty
principle operates here; the measurement process inevitably introduces
uncertainties. How
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Blake Cretney wrote:
Forest Simmons wrote:
The utilities don't have to be utilitarian. They include the
altruistic
values held dear by the voters as well as their economic interests.
But if you're hoping to use the method to find the candidate that
Pragmatically speaking, in a democracy what do we have besides voter
utilities, intuitions, and hunches to measure the goodness of a candidate?
The utilities don't have to be utilitarian. They include the altruistic
values held dear by the voters as well as their economic interests.
The
Forest Simmons wrote:
That still leaves open at least two important questions.
(1) How do we ascertain voter utilities accurately? The uncertainty
principle operates here; the measurement process inevitably introduces
uncertainties. How do we minimize this uncertainty to the extent
Forest Simmons wrote:
Pragmatically speaking, in a democracy what do we have besides voter
utilities, intuitions, and hunches to measure the goodness of a
candidate?
Well, voters may have sound reasons. But you're right that we have only
the voters to go by. But if there is such a thing
MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
Blake said:
You haven't actually brought out an argument in favour of your position.
The fact that there exist candidates that are best for some people
isn't in dispute and doesn't address the issue.
I reply:
Actually, I claim that it does address the issue, and
Blake said:
You haven't actually brought out an argument in favour of your position.
The fact that there exist candidates that are best for some people
isn't in dispute and doesn't address the issue.
I reply:
Actually, I claim that it does address the issue, and that it
means that there's no
