At 01:09 PM 6/23/2008, Stéphane Rouillon wrote:
After a nice discussion about keeping cool,
usually a great idea if one can manage it. On the
other hand, sometimes getting a little hot can get things done.
So now can you acknoledge that IRV is better than FPTP ?
I can accpet IRV being worst
Kathy Dopp quoted approvingly from this Abd post
and told me off for not addressing it, so here goes.
Abd:
Later-No-Harm is FairVote's favorite election
criterion. That's because the peculiar design of
sequential elimination guarantees -- if a
majority is not required -- that a lower
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 7:19 PM
But, in the United States, where I live, IRV
isn't replacing pure FPTP. It's replacing Top Two
Runoff (TTR). And it is pretty clear to me that
TTR is superior in just about every way,
I suspect all such judgements must in the end be
I thought I could ask a few questions while otherwise being busy making
my next simulator version :-) So here goes..
First, when a group elects a smaller group (as a parliament might do
with a government, although real parliaments don't do it this way),
should the method used to elect the
Dear Jobst,
Yes, great fun, and simple to boot!
This method should be called the Magnanimous Method. The voter of the first
drawn ballot is not punished for not going along with everybody else, and
there's still plenty of prior incentive to cooperate, because chances are small
for getting
Hi Juho,
--- En date de : Jeu 3.7.08, Juho [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
That scenario was the simplest I could imagine. Only three
candidates. One strong candidate but below majority, one
weaker
runner-up, and third clearly weaker candidate. This was
also the most
threatening scenario
Another IRV disaster in San Francisco and in Pierce Co, WA:
San Francisco: Vote tallying could present another fiasco
http://www.examiner.com/a-1472574~Vote_tallying_could_present_another_fiasco.html
-- Forwarded message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, Jul
