On Dec 22, 2007, at 6:45 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
If you wish to utilise in some way all the information that could be
recorded on a preferential ballot, that is a completely
different voting system from IRV, with different objectives. The
preferences are no longer 'contingency
Jonathan,
--- Jonathan Lundell [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
On Dec 22, 2007, at 6:45 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
If you wish to utilise in some way all the information that could be
recorded on a preferential ballot, that is a completely
different voting system from IRV, with different
On Dec 22, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Jonathan,
--- Jonathan Lundell [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
On Dec 22, 2007, at 6:45 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
If you wish to utilise in some way all the information that could be
recorded on a preferential ballot, that is a completely
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 19:09:49 - James Gilmour wrote:
Dave Ketchum Sent: 22 December 2007 18:01
Conceded that some could like IRV, even after understanding what it does.
It wasn't my intent to make any point for or against IRV, but it interesting
another thread is discussing the
Jonathan,
--- Jonathan Lundell [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
It's easy to produce a counterexample for a multiple-seat STV
election. Here the voter must deal with two different contingencies:
my first choice might be eliminated, or my first choice might be
elected with a surplus. My
Dave Ketchum Sent: 22 December 2007 21:52
Out of all this I see very little possible use for differences:
That is the problem. So you will continue to describe the different ballots
and voting systems incorrectly.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 22:03:03 - James Gilmour wrote:
Dave Ketchum Sent: 22 December 2007 21:52
Out of all this I see very little possible use for differences:
That is the problem. So you will continue to describe the different ballots
and voting systems incorrectly.
Topic of the
RELEASE:
http://electionarchive.org/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=148Itemid=41
HOW EASY IS IT TO AUDIT ELECTIONS WITH 95% CONFIDENCE-LEVEL?
The National Election Data Archive
Park City, UT
December 22, 2007
A new analysis using Utah's 2004 General Election results, finds that
Just a quick followup to Abd, since I think my message may have gotten lost
in a long post of interspersed replies.
I still want to ask a very, very simple question, and I don't think you
answered it. But this time I will go to some extra effort to make sure it
is interpreted for the simple
-
What do you think of this lawsuit?
Kathy
-- Forwarded message --
From: Raging Grannie (Wanda B) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Dec 22, 2007 8:19 PM
Subject: FYI - FairVote MN Responds to Lawsuit Against IRV
go to http://fairvotemn.orgFairVoteMN.org if you have trouble viewing
this
At 01:32 AM 12/22/2007, rob brown wrote:
Your example is for more than two candidates.
Well, it might seem that way. But there are really only two choices
that make any sense. The third pizza type was in there simply to make
the normalization scores make sense. If it's not there, there is a
On Dec 22, 2007 8:04 PM, Jan Kok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And then they'd probably stop by his house on the way home and
burn it to the ground.
:-) A good illustration of people having a strong preference, eh? :-)
G - [Z] voters wouldn't care as much, and would tend to concentrate on
12 matches
Mail list logo
