On 9/15/08, Fred Gohlke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good Morning, Raph
re: (With regard to the suggestion that the process 'Have one
triad judge the other'):
Well, the person can still try to convince the judges, the
point is that he doesn't act as judge of his own fitness.
On 9/15/08, Fred Gohlke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Holders of minority views who wish their view to gain ascendancy have an
obligation to persuade the majority of their compatriots that their
(currently minority) view is advantageous for all the people. If they can
not do so, they have no
On 9/16/08, Michael Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like you said about Napster, even with a small number of people, it
was worth using. But I'm mistaken to claim that Napster was
therefore free of scale dependencies. It's not either/or. A
start-up threshold can be orthogonal to a network
Raph Frank wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A random assembly also resists the attack where one corrupts
candidates, simply because it's not clear who the candidates are
going to be.
There is also the effect that a person who wants to be
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
That is interesting. Perhaps one could have, for example, a Condorcet
party that pledges to run the Condorcet winner of an earlier internal
election for president. Then various small parties could nominally join up
with the Condorcet party, and that party would
Fred Gohlke wrote:
Good Morning, Kristofer
Thanks for the link. I'll check it as soon as I can.
re: If the council is of size 7, no opinion that holds less than
1/7 of the voters can be represented, so if the opinion is
spread too thin, it'll be removed from the system; but if
