election-methods-electorama.com  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [EM] ER-Bucklin fails monotonicity James J Faran
  • Re: [EM] ER-Bucklin fails monotonicity Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] ER-Bucklin fails monotonicity James J Faran
  • Re: [EM] ER-Bucklin fails monotonicity Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] ER-Bucklin fails monotonicity Chris Benham
• [EM] MDDA3, 67%MDDA, & 67%MDDA3 MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] MDDA3, 67%MDDA, & 67%MDDA3 Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Condorcet and FBC are incompatible Kevin Venzke
• [EM] RE: FBC, Clone-Winner, and pairwise components seem incompatible Simmons, Forest
  • RE: [EM] RE: FBC, Clone-Winner, and pairwise components seem incompatible Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Brief comment on Russ's posting MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Brief comment on Russ's posting Russ Paielli
• Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Russ Paielli
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Jobst Heitzig
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Bill Clark
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Jobst Heitzig
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting] Abd ulRahman Lomax
• [EM] Part 2, Mr. Lomax's posting MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Part 2, Mr. Lomax's posting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] Mr. Lomax's "non'-reply, part 1 MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] FBC, Clone-Winner, and pairwise components seem incompatible Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] FBC, Clone-Winner, and pairwise components seem incompatible Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] FBC, Clone-Winner, and pairwise components seem incompatible Kevin Venzke
• [EM] 2200 GMT, 24 June, '05, Ted MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Ted, 6/24/05,2124 GMT MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Completed comments on Abd's posting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] Reform isn't whiny, but whining about reform suggestions is whiny. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Thought on Redistricting Algorithms Alex Small
  • Re: [EM] Thought on Redistricting Algorithms Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] James: Definition, electowiki MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • [EM] Re: James: Definition, electowiki Araucaria Araucana
  • Re: [EM] Re: James: Definition, electowiki Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] Re: James: Definition, electowiki Araucaria Araucana
  • Re: [EM] Re: James: Definition, electowiki Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] correction, was Re: James: Definition, electowiki Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] James: Definition, electowiki James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Mike: my mistake James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Majority-defeat-disqualification//Approval sounds like the best MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] Majority-defeat-disqualification//Approval sounds like the best Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Mike: what is the "tied at the top rule"? James Green-Armytage
• [EM] FBC isn't complicated. PT isn't dangerous. Reform isn't whiny. MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] FBC isn't complicated. PT isn't dangerous. Reform isn't whiny. Paul Kislanko
  • Re: [EM] FBC isn't complicated. PT isn't dangerous. Reform isn't whiny. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] A new method satisfying FBC, SDSC, and SFC Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Chris--Correct: MMPO is Approval MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] A few more comments about Russ's MMPO posting MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Kevin: Your MMPOpt example MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Kevin: Power Truncation MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] Kevin: Power Truncation Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Comments on Russ's MinMax posting MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Comments on Russ's MinMax posting Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Comments on Russ's MinMax posting Russ Paielli
• [EM] Chris, 6/19/05, 2209 MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Chris: Brief preliminary power truncation reply MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Clarification about trust & hope for borderline strategizers MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] AERLO loses any FBC. MMPO is Approval. Still the best public method. MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] AERLO loses any FBC. MMPO is Approval. Still the best public method. Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • RE: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] Re: minmax is not a good public election method Chris Benham
• [EM] James: Power truncation MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] James: Power truncation Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Contd, ASPCA yes. SOACC & SFBC no. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Enhanced MMPO fails FBC but conditionally meets expectation FBC. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] SPCA, ASPCA, CSPCA yes. SOACC & SFBC no. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] The elusive description of enhanced MMPO's benefits MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Election-methods Digest no longer reliable RLSuter
  • Re: [EM] Election-methods Digest no longer reliable Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] Election-methods Digest no longer reliable RLSuter
• [EM] The poll is a good idea--suggestions for a better one MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] The poll is a good idea--suggestions for a better one James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] The poll is a good idea--suggestions for a better one Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] Election Methods Polls Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] The poll is a good idea--suggestions for a better one Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] The poll is a good idea--suggestions for a better one Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] New name for SSPCA? MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Clarification about ranking someone at 2 rank positions MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Who says you can't vote a candidate at 2 rank positions. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Power truncation MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] Power truncation Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] Power truncation Chris Benham
  • RE: [EM] Power truncation Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] Power truncation Chris Benham
  • [EM] Power Truncation MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Sincere Protection of Candidates Acceptable (SPCA) MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] weigh in on the method poll! James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] weigh in on the method poll! Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] weigh in on the method poll! Dave Ketchum
  • Re: [EM] weigh in on the method poll! Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] Contd, Oops! MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Kevin: Oops! It's a matter of finding out how much of SOACC & SFBC can be saved. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Minor corrections to yesterday's postings MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] the simplest election reform Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Araucaria Araucana
  • RE: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Dave Ketchum
  • [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Araucaria Araucana
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Anthony Duff
  • RE: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Paul Kislanko
  • [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Araucaria Araucana
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Dave Ketchum
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] Re: the simplest election reform Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] the simplest election reform Andrew Myers
  • Re: [EM] the simplest election reform Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• [EM] Are rank methods really better than Approval & CR? MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] The Sincere Optimality for Acceptable Candidates Criterion MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] The Sincere Optimality for Acceptable Candidates Criterion Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Brief clarification of two recent postings MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] A simpler geographical example showing that mere ordinal info is inadequate Simmons, Forest
• [EM] another wiki poll - assign ratings to single-winner methods! James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] another wiki poll - assign ratings to single-winner methods! James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] another wiki poll - assign ratings to single-winner methods! Kevin Venzke
• [EM] wiki opinion poll James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] wiki opinion poll Juho Laatu
• [EM] Two questions added to wiki questionaire MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] The wiki questionaire MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] The wiki questionaire Jobst Heitzig
  • Re: [EM] The wiki questionaire Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • RE: [EM] The wiki questionaire Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] The wiki questionaire Chris Benham
  • [EM] The wiki questionaire Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] The wiki questionaire Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] The wiki questionaire Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] The wiki questionaire Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] The wiki questionaire Chris Benham
• [EM] Nanson MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • [EM] Nanson Simon Gazeley
• [EM] James--MMPO & wv strategy wrap-up MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] IRV _does_ meet IICC MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] NANSON - Elections to one seat Simon Gazeley
  • Re: [EM] NANSON - Elections to one seat James Green-Armytage
• [EM] ICC posting comments MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: ICC and Approval MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • RE: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval Paul Kislanko
  • Re: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval Russ Paielli
  • RE: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval Kevin Venzke
  • Re: [EM] Re: ICC and Approval James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Mike: order reversal incentive in approval? MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] wv strategy MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Miscellaneous addenda to SSD vs MMPO MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Dynamic Opinion Poll in our Wiki Jobst Heitzig
  • Re: [EM] Dynamic Opinion Poll in our Wiki Abd ulRahman Lomax
• [EM] MMPO has incentive for reversa l, but not compromise-reversal. MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] MMPO has incentive for reversa l, but not compromise-reversal. James Green-Armytage
  • [EM] Mike: order reversal incentive in approval? James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] Mike: order reversal incentive in approval? Bart Ingles
  • Re: [EM] Mike: order reversal incentive in approval? Abd ulRahman Lomax
  • Re: [EM] order reversal incentive in approval? James Green-Armytage
• [EM] SSD vs MMPO. What's important in voting system results. MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Voting Systems Study of the League of Women Voters of Minnesota Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] Re: Voting Systems Study of the League of Women Voters of Minnesota Abd ulRahman Lomax
• [EM] two more variations of MMPO (oops! CDTT, not CGTT) Chris Benham
• [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] two more variations of MMPO Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Kevin Venzke
  • [EM] two more variations of MMPO Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
  • Re: [EM] two more variations of MMPO Russ Paielli
• [EM] Re: CIBR examples, and its CC failure Chris Benham
  • Re: [EM] Re: CIBR examples, and its CC failure Ken Kuhlman
  • [EM] Re: CIBR examples, and its CC failure Juho Laatu
• [EM] James: MMPO & criteria MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • [EM] Mike: does MM(po) have compromising-reversal incentive?? James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval and ICC James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] approval and ICC Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
  • [EM] Approval and ICC MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] James: Of course there's defensive truncation incentive MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Not only _would_ Nader be CW, but Nader _is_ CW in most rank polls MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Not only _would_ Nader be CW, but Nader _is_ CW in most rank polls Abd ulRahman Lomax
• [EM] Re: Campaign reform MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Chris: If just one "B" voter ranks a 2nd choice in your MMPO example... MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • [EM] Chris: If just one "B" voter ranks a 2nd choice in your MMPO example... Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Voting Systems Study of the League of Women Voters of Minnesota Chris Benham
• [EM] MMPO vs PC addendum MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] MMPO vs PC addendum James Green-Armytage
  • Re: [EM] MMPO vs PC addendum Kevin Venzke
• [EM] Fair coverage MIKE OSSIPOFF
  • Re: [EM] Fair coverage Curt Siffert

• Earlier messages
• Later messages