I recalled the cfj allowing me to do this, but obviously that is not
successful if this actually worked, so I suggest that somebody else call
the same CFJ again.
The dependencies this week have been quite intolerable.
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
I really have no clue what this means; odds are good that I'd just (as vote
collector) decide that if there was any complexity at all, I'd just resolve
the darn thing as PRESENT due to ambiguity.
Wouldn't replacing the vote
coppro wrote:
Proposal: WTF does this even do? (AI=2, II=1)
{{{
Amend Rule 2154 (Election Procedure) by replacing
3) Each eligible voter's voting limit is one. An ordered list
of multiple choices constitutes a conditional vote for the
first choice if it could
On 04/04/2010 11:25 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
I was trying to implement instant runoff voting, e.g. if the votes are
3 for ais523
3 for BobTHJ
2 for comex
1 for (comex, ais523)
then the last vote evaluates to ais523.
Attempted rewrite:
An ordered list of multiple choices is
On 4 April 2010 21:15, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/04/2010 11:25 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
I was trying to implement instant runoff voting, e.g. if the votes are
3 for ais523
3 for BobTHJ
2 for comex
1 for (comex, ais523)
then the last vote evaluates to ais523.
Attempted
5 matches
Mail list logo