Why did you replace MJ with MCA? I understand that MCA's Bucklin-like logic is somewhat easier to explain to those who don't know what a median is; and certainly the methods are similar enough; but I deliberately chose to speak of MJ as the representative Bucklin method, because it has the clearest definition and the strongest support in the academic and popular literature. I still think MJ is the right choice for this statement, though I could be convinced otherwise if some serious MCA supporters came out of the woodwork.
JQ 2011/8/30 Richard Fobes <[email protected]> > On 8/29/2011 6:39 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote: > > I have made some further changes to the statement > > <https://docs.google.com/**document/d/**1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3** > Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US> > > > > ... > > And I've made yet more changes -- to implement the requests made earlier. > > <https://docs.google.com/**document/d/**1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3** > Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oyJLxI9dciXBbowM5mougnbGHzkL3Ue1QkD8nnMwWLg/edit?hl=en_US> > > > > I have not yet written the section about rounds of voting, which is an > addition that was requested. > > Richard Fobes > > > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
