> From: Gervase Lam > Subject: Re: [EM] Re: Election-methods Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13 > Date: Thursday 14 October 2004 22:41 pm
> >�From: Matthew Dempsky > >�Subject: Re: [EM] Re: Election-methods Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13 > >�Date: Thursday 14 October 2004 02:09 am > > > >�On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 20:45, Gervase Lam wrote: > >�> Kemeny can be basically described as follows: > > > >�> [...example elided...] > > > >�It seems similar in concept to finding the line of best fit, which > > I'll note tries to minimize the sum of squared differences rather than > > simply the sum of absolute differences. �Has that alternative been > > considered? > > I don't think so, no. �However, the only way I can think of using this > is possibly for multi-winner (e.g. a panel of candidates) election. �See > <>. However, it talks about cardinal social utilities. �Condorcet > methods don't have cardinal utilities as the input. Whoops! It might have been a good idea surf the web first so that I could put a link in between the '<' and '>', and then send the e-mail rather than sending the e-mail first... <http://lists.electorama.com/htdig.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com/2001-January/004978.html> Unfortunately, the formatting of the page is not very good. Search for the word "isotone" on Yahoo Groups for this list might get something slightly better. Thanks, Gervase. ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
