On 01/08/2013 04:30 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
2013/1/7 Greg Nisbet gregory.nis...@gmail.com
mailto:gregory.nis...@gmail.com
Hey, I'd like to get a sense of what sorts of multiwinner methods
are currently known that are reasonably good and don't require
districts, parties, or
There's some definite motivation for writing the list of criteria to
exclude parties, districts, and relying on candidates making decisions.
These sorts of mechanisms are not always available (for instance, picking
pizza toppings or locations or something of that nature). That's not to say
that
So should this realization by Jameson Quinn tell us that all previous historical
examples of Bucklin voting should be regarded as examples of the
Majority-Judgment median-based system,
and hence can be used to help evaluate how the latter behaves in practice?
Unfortunately I think not because I
At 03:24 AM 1/8/2013, Greg Nisbet wrote:
There's some definite motivation for writing the list of criteria to
exclude parties, districts, and relying on candidates making
decisions. These sorts of mechanisms are not always available (for
instance, picking pizza toppings or locations or
At 09:34 PM 1/7/2013, William Waugh wrote:
If I were a strategist for a party that has not had a plurality but
may be coming close to one, I would see no reason to treat any kind
of Bucklin election differently from an Approval election, unless I
am missing something.
It is an Approval
At 01:03 PM 1/8/2013, Warren Smith wrote:
So should this realization by Jameson Quinn tell us that all
previous historical
examples of Bucklin voting should be regarded as examples of the
Majority-Judgment median-based system,
and hence can be used to help evaluate how the latter behaves in
On 1/8/13 1:03 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
So should this realization by Jameson Quinn tell us that all previous historical
examples of Bucklin voting should be regarded as examples of the
Majority-Judgment median-based system,
and hence can be used to help evaluate how the latter behaves in
On 1/7/2013 1:04 PM, Greg Nisbet wrote:
Hey, I'd like to get a sense of what sorts of multiwinner methods are
currently known that are reasonably good and don't require districts,
parties, or candidates that are capable of making decisions
On 1/8/2013 12:24 AM, Greg Nisbet wrote:
On 01/08/2013 09:24 AM, Greg Nisbet wrote:
There's some definite motivation for writing the list of criteria to
exclude parties, districts, and relying on candidates making decisions.
These sorts of mechanisms are not always available (for instance,
picking pizza toppings or locations or
I don't doubt that Asset has some desirable properties, but trying to
compare it to conservative methods like STV is difficult. In particular,
conservative multiwinner methods are more amenable to Bayesian Regret-type
simulations than methods with districts, parties, or candidates capable of
I'd said:
Exactly. Your letter-grades encourage sub-optimal voting.
Jameson said:
Zero-info optimal strategy is to vote on an absolute scale such that for
recent elections you would have given equal numbers of each grade A-D and
twice that number of Fs. (Or slightly more sophisticated: give the
At 02:31 PM 1/8/2013, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On 1/8/13 1:03 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
So should this realization by Jameson Quinn tell us that all
previous historical
examples of Bucklin voting should be regarded as examples of the
Majority-Judgment median-based system,
and hence can be
12 matches
Mail list logo
