James--
I'd said:
"MIKE OSSIPOFF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Here is the ballot for the presidential poll. There are 24 candidates, unless I've missed on, which isn't likely.
You replied:
As I remember, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, and Robert Byrd were all seconded. So I think that they should be on that list.
I reply:
Sorry about that. I just forgot them, and didn't find them when I read the poll e-mail when making the ballot. I throught that I'd read all the postings that mentioned the poll in their subject line, but maybe there were nominations in postings that didn't mention the poll in their subject lines.
Also, Al Gore was nominated too, and I forgot to include him too.
Were Zinn, Chomsky, Gore & Byrd the only ones that I missed?
I'm going to post a new ballot that includes those.
It seems to me that the voting deadline should be a week after the _complete_ ballot is posted.
I'm going to go through all the postings posted since I proposed the poll, to look for other nominations.
You continued:
Also, I would like to suggest that you'all rank Al Gore
I reply:
Gore was nominated--I just forgot to include him.
You continued:
(the incumbent ; )
I reply:
That's right--Gore is the legitimate incumbant president. That, by itself, is enough reason to include him in the poll even if he hadn't been nominated.
Of course he has a disadvantage: Our experience with him as vice-president.
It doesn't take any experience to recognize Kerry as the worst remaining Democrat, but some of the other Democrats have a chance of being better than Gore.
You continued:
As for the methods being used, I noticed that plain ole IRV wasn't on Mike's list. I suppose that's not too important, though, since the raw data will be publicly available, and anyone who wants to can run an IRV tally. So, yeah, I hope someone does that. Maybe I will, I dunno.
I reply:
Since the complete ballot hasn't been sent out yet, shouldn't we call that a nomination for IRV's inclusion?
Also, someone suggested a different way of counting the CR ratings, and I forgot to include that in the list of nominated methods. So I'll post a more complete list that includes the modified CR and ordinary IRV.
I'd nominate NES, but then I'd have to count it. I'd nominate SMA, but since I'm the one who is late in posting the complete ballot, it's questionable whether the late ballot should allow me to make a late nomination. But of course, nominated or not, there's no reason why I shouldn't post an SMA result after the pairwise matrix is posted. In fact, with that pairwise matrix, anyone could easily determine the SMA winner, from its posted definition.
You continued:
Should I make the subject heading on my ballot "my ballot"? I reply:
Yes, that's what I suggest, to make the ballots easy to recognize. The subject line needn't contain the voter's name, since that's automatically listed.
But if you modify your ballot, as you're allowed to at any time up to the voting deadline, as many times as you want to, it would be best to include the date and time in your subject line, just in case you post 2 ballots that post in order different from that in which you sent them.
Maybe this goes without saying, but I want to clarify it: It seems to me that even though this is a poll for the U.S. president, everyone anywhere should be able to have a vote that counts equally toward the winner by each method. We've all noticed how our presidents have an effect outside the U.S.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Get fast, reliable access with MSN 9 Dial-up. Click here for Special Offer! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
