As I said the model is very simple. It could be
complicated by allowing for no votes at all, thus
one has 28000(0.62V+0.5W), where V+W<1. This would
make the resulting deltas smaller, but require the
input of an additional unknown parameter. The
point that I intended to suggest is that everyone
assumes V=1, which is a fallicy, and that the
brouhaha may well be about something that is
unlikely to happen.
Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
> Surely some voters would choose to leave the ballot blank. If I
> didn't like any of the presidential candidates, but I thought that
> some more local election was worth voting in, I might do that. In
> fact, in the local municipal election that we just had, I was allowed
> to vote for as many as 4 candidates, but only chose to vote for 2.
>
> I would hope that the recount is an attempt to correct counting
> errors, not to create votes where there were none.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 09:32:31 -0500, Bob Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >The model is simplified, but I assume that (B)
> >votes will be counted by "divining the voter's
> >intent" through chance imperfections in the
> >ballots. Thus the probability is 0.50.
> >
> >Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 22:49:41 -0500, Bob Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >There are two possibilities: (A) a vote was
> >> >attempted; (B) no vote was attempted. Let us
> >> >assume that for (A) the probability of a Gore vote
> >> >is 0.62, and 0.50 for (B),
> >>
> >> If no vote was attempted, then surely the probability that a vote for
> >> Gore was attempted is 0, not 0.50.
> >>
> >> Duncan Murdoch
--
Bob Wheeler --- (Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
ECHIP, Inc.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
