Woodall free riding uses some irrelevant candidate that is ranked first.
Hylland free riding does not rank the favourite candidate.
A third approach to free riding is to rearrange the candidates to
reflect the estimated probabilities.
The true preference order of a voter is ABCDE... The
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Juho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To gain even
better trust that this set is the best one one could publish the best found
set and then wait for a week and allow other interested parties to seek for
even better sets. Maybe different parties or candidates try to
On Aug 31, 2008, at 8:25 AM, Raph Frank wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Juho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To gain even
better trust that this set is the best one one could publish the
best found
set and then wait for a week and allow other interested parties to
seek for
even better
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Brian Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 8:25 AM, Raph Frank wrote:
Ofc, he doesn't define geographic centers of the districts, which
presumably means the centre of gravity of the district.
I'm pretty sure I want the average point of the land
Hallo,
Juho wrote (31 Aug 2008):
Woodall free riding uses some irrelevant candidate that
is ranked first.
Hylland free riding does not rank the favourite candidate.
A third approach to free riding is to rearrange the
candidates to reflect the estimated probabilities.
The true
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Markus Schulze
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Raph Frank wrote (31 Aug 2008):
I think this is the strategy that most parties actually
use for vote management. They never recommend to the
voters not to rank a certain party member.
Actually, it is the main
On Aug 31, 2008, at 15:25 , Raph Frank wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Juho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To gain even
better trust that this set is the best one one could publish the
best found
set and then wait for a week and allow other interested parties to
seek for
even better
On Aug 31, 2008, at 22:28 , Markus Schulze wrote:
Juho wrote (31 Aug 2008):
Woodall free riding uses some irrelevant candidate that
is ranked first.
Hylland free riding does not rank the favourite candidate.
A third approach to free riding is to rearrange the
candidates to reflect the
On Aug 31, 2008, at 19:52 , Raph Frank wrote:
The true preference order of a voter is ABCDE... The voter
expects A to
be elected quite certainly. Candidates B and C are less certain.
The voter
considers B and C to be almost as good as A. Candidates starting
from D are
considerably worse.
Thank you for writing that, Brian Olson, I felt it but wouldn't say it.
My impression, from trying to follow some of the discussions on this
site, is that there's little, if any, interest in democracy. Instead,
the esoteric schemes proposed here seem intended to empower minorities
(factions,
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:25:49 +0100
From: Raph Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] A computationally feasible method
Brian Olson suggests this approach for his anti-gerrymandering proposals.
http://bolson.org/dist/USIRA.html
and
http://bolson.org/dist/
I suggested a similar
From: Kathy Dopp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Raph Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Olson suggests this approach for his anti-gerrymandering proposals.
http://bolson.org/dist/USIRA.html
and
http://bolson.org/dist/
I suggested a similar mathematical method for drawing Congressional
districts a few
There was a discussion of district-drawing algorithms on the
election-methods list a few years back. I've always thought that taking
centroidal Voronoi cells with equal populations was an elegant way to do
it. Here's an example of standard Voronoi cells and the centroidal
version I pulled
13 matches
Mail list logo
