On May 11, 2008, at 1:58 , Kathy Dopp wrote:
Friends,
I need help to rebut these points about IRV voting that are being
spread via a US League of Women Voters' email list that is tracked by
persons in the US office of the LWV (and apparently the LWV of Mass.
has already officially taken a
Good Afternoon, Juho
re: Only on the (country independent) technical properties of the
groups of three method.
(If there are e.g. two parties, one small and one large, the
probability of getting two small party supporters (that would elect one
of them to the next higher level) in a group of
Good Afternoon, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
re: Mr. Gohlke, do you care to look at this?
OK. Absent a specific definition of the group of voters to which you've
assigned a ratio of 'p', 'p' can be taken to represent any group of
people who have an identifiable political orientation, and 'x' is the
From: Kathy Dopp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Comments below
-- Forwarded message --
From:? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, May 10, 2008 at 7:22 AM
Pathological scenarios
can be constructed for all voting systems, including whatever ones Kathy
may prefer to IRV.
Diagrams from
On May 11, 2008, at 10:00 PM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
However, I had not even thought of the need to
count all state-level races at the State-level, rather than the county
level, or about some of the other issues you mentioned.
I don't see that as a significant problem these days. There has to be
