Yes.
Thank you Doug. I woke up this a.m. realizing that fact.
However, then the City must admit that all voters who voted DougMeg
and did not list a third choice, have their votes diluted to less than
one vote, since the vote values these voters retain is 1 - 0.0434
In either case, no matter
On Oct 8, 2008, at 9:30 AM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
Yes.
Thank you Doug. I woke up this a.m. realizing that fact.
It's Jonathan, but never mind
However, then the City must admit that all voters who voted DougMeg
and did not list a third choice, have their votes diluted to less than
one
James Gilmour asks:
Can you please provide a link to a directory where we can find
all of the relevant documents, and with their correct titles,
as referenced in the various legal texts?
Initial briefs:
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Lundell Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 7:18 PM
Consider a voter who declines to list even a first choice: her vote
value is 0, and yet we don't consider that to be unequal treatment
in a plurality election.
Jonathan, we can much further than that. Never mind the elector who
On your site, you also include a brief attacking multiwinner STV, at
http://electionmathematics.org/em-IRV/ReplyMemoJG10-6-08.pdf. Do you agree with
the argument presented?
--- On Mon, 10/6/08, Kathy Dopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Kathy Dopp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Fwd: FW: IRV
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:03 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Aaron Armitage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Fwd: FW: IRV Challenge - Press Announcement
To: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text
Announcement
To: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 7:17 PM
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:03 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:30:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Aaron Armitage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Fwd: FW: IRV Challenge - Press
