IMO, the best thing you could do to advance SODA is to support FairVote and IRV3/AV3 as worthy of our approval, even if they're not our first-ranked choice, make nice with Rob Richie and network with third party folks around the world about your idea.
dlw On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jameson Quinn <[email protected]>wrote: > Cheers. It's been nice to have you around. I have been hard on you where > we disagree; but in general, beyond the details of your theories, I think > that your focus on what is actually achievable is a very healthy reminder. > > Jameson > > > 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <[email protected]> > >> I'm going to unsuscribe for a spell at least tomorrow night. >> It's been fun, for the most part. >> >> I think my attempt at an intervention in the electoral debate here >> probably reached the point of diminishing returns a bit back... >> peace, >> dlw >> >> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:52 PM, < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Send Election-Methods mailing list submissions to >>> [email protected] >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> >>> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com >>> >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> [email protected] >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> [email protected] >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of Election-Methods digest..." >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Does Range need an abstention/participation tally? (Jameson Quinn) >>> 2. Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (David L Wetzell) >>> 3. Oscar Voting (David L Wetzell) >>> 4. Re: Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (Jameson Quinn) >>> 5. Re: Oscar Voting (Jameson Quinn) >>> 6. Re: Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (David L Wetzell) >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Jameson Quinn <[email protected]> >>> To: EM <[email protected]>, >>> electionsciencefoundation <[email protected]> >>> Cc: >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:15:01 -0600 >>> Subject: [EM] Does Range need an abstention/participation tally? >>> I'm working on sketching out data structures so that Helios >>> Voting<https://vote.heliosvoting.org/>, >>> an online, open-source, cryptographically-verifiable voting system, can use >>> advanced voting procedures such as Range, Majority Judgment, and SODA. >>> (Condorcet is a significantly harder problem but probably doable, and IRV >>> is essentially impossible). >>> >>> My question is: for the Range voting structures, is it acceptable to >>> just keep one tally (total score) for each candidate, or do you also need a >>> tally of number of voters who rated/didn't rate a candidate? The latter >>> would be used for average-based schemes; so this question is equivalent to >>> asking, are such schemes important enough to be worth making the data >>> structures more complex? Since I'm the one signing up for the programming >>> work here, I'd appreciate it if answers that ask me to do more work have a >>> reasoning and a strength (ie, "I'd kinda prefer it" versus "I think it is >>> absolutely necessary"). >>> >>> Jameson >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> To: EM <[email protected]> >>> Cc: >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:35:14 -0600 >>> Subject: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? >>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English >>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of uber-mathematically >>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic >>> Economics movement. <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of >>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political >>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics. >>> >>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best >>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average >>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to >>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral >>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike >>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political >>> brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>. >>> >>> >>> But I do believe that many more folks can learn to vote more rationally >>> and that third parties and caucuses within major parties are the right >>> groups for them to learn how to do that, but that's why I'm so enthusiastic >>> about the strategic use of PR in "more local" elections, which ideally >>> would by giving activists more exit threat would lead to the use of more >>> caucuses like what is used by the Democrat-Farm-Labor party in >>> MN.<http://dfl.org/about/caucuses-conventions> >>> >>> So I'm not saying don't do electoral analytics, but don't lose sight of >>> the ambiguities involved in relating utopic, abstract models back to real >>> life. >>> >>> dlw >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> To: EM <[email protected]> >>> Cc: >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:40:40 -0600 >>> Subject: [EM] Oscar Voting >>> Steve Pond: >>> http://www.thewrap.com/awards/column-post/oscar-voting-now-passions-got-nothing-do-it-35468?page=0,0 >>> >>> The P of irv is on the rise, in addition to with the endorsement of >>> Barack Obama as highlighted in Rob Richies editorial in the NYTimes, and >>> we're not likely to change that in a way that similarly raises the P of >>> *one *alternative. >>> dlw >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Jameson Quinn <[email protected]> >>> To: David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> Cc: EM <[email protected]> >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:42:38 -0600 >>> Subject: Re: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? >>> >>> >>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> >>>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English >>>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of uber-mathematically >>>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic >>>> Economics movement. <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of >>>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political >>>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics. >>>> >>>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best >>>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average >>>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to >>>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral >>>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike >>>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political >>>> brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I too consider my advocacy of SODA, and to a lesser extent MJ, as being >>> strongly informed by a humanistic/cognitive view. It seems quite possible >>> that one of us is wrong. >>> >>> Jameson >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Jameson Quinn <[email protected]> >>> To: David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> Cc: EM <[email protected]> >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:47:42 -0600 >>> Subject: Re: [EM] Oscar Voting >>> Um, the McCain/Obama endorsements are very old news – for instance, it's >>> from before either MJ or SODA even existed. (I know in the latter case >>> that's not saying much, nor am I claiming that Obama would be more likely >>> to endorse SODA today, I'm just saying that there are two systems today >>> that I consider reasonably well-explored and better than what existed >>> previously, that didn't exist over in the early 2000s when Obama endorsed >>> IRV.) >>> >>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> >>>> Steve Pond: >>>> http://www.thewrap.com/awards/column-post/oscar-voting-now-passions-got-nothing-do-it-35468?page=0,0 >>>> >>>> The P of irv is on the rise, in addition to with the endorsement of >>>> Barack Obama as highlighted in Rob Richies editorial in the NYTimes, and >>>> we're not likely to change that in a way that similarly raises the P of >>>> *one *alternative. >>>> dlw >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list >>>> info >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>> To: Jameson Quinn <[email protected]> >>> Cc: EM <[email protected]> >>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:52:01 -0600 >>> Subject: Re: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? >>> We could both be right, one in the short-run and the other in the >>> long-run... >>> >>> dlw >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Jameson Quinn >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English >>>>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of >>>>> uber-mathematically >>>>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic >>>>> Economics movement. <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of >>>>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political >>>>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics. >>>>> >>>>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best >>>>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average >>>>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to >>>>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral >>>>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike >>>>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political >>>>> brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> I too consider my advocacy of SODA, and to a lesser extent MJ, as being >>>> strongly informed by a humanistic/cognitive view. It seems quite possible >>>> that one of us is wrong. >>>> >>>> Jameson >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Election-Methods mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com >>> >>> >> >> ---- >> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list >> info >> >> >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
