Juho Laatu wrote:
If private and public opinions differ, then which is the
manipulated one?
If they deviate it is hard to imagine
that the private opinion would not be
the sincere one.
That's because you are thinking of individual opinion. Consider:
* private opinion informed by
Michael Allan wrote:
Juho Laatu wrote:
If private and public opinions differ, then which is the
manipulated one?
If they deviate it is hard to imagine
that the private opinion would not be
the sincere one.
That's because you are thinking of individual opinion. Consider:
* private
On Jan 18, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Juho Laatu wrote:
--- On Mon, 19/1/09, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.com wrote:
- Why was the first set of definitions
not good enough for Approval? (I read
rank as referring to the sincere
personal opinions, not to the ballot.)
vi ranks, and vi is by
Dear Kristofer Munsterhjelm,
you wrote (19 Jan 2009):
So voters prefer MAM winners to Beatpath winners
more often than vice versa. What method is the
best in that respect?
Copeland methods are the best methods in this
respect.
The fact, that the ranked pairs winner usually
pairwise beats
FYI,
FairVote Minnesota does not and never has had any legal connection to
the national organization known as FairVote (though they obviously
communicate and are collegial). The views of Tony Solgard are his, and not
FairVote's. FairVote does not argue that Condorcet methods would violate
the
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Could not these domains work together? To my knowledge, that's what happens
now. People discuss politics and find out what they're going to vote. Any
sort of improvement on the availability of discussion, as well as of
information of representatives' actions
From: Markus Schulze markus.schu...@alumni.tu-berlin.de
Subject: Re: [EM] IRV and Brown vs. Smallwood
Tony Solgard was president of FairVote Minnesota
when he wrote the quoted article in which he claims
that Condorcet was unconstitutional in Minnesota.
Also the report by the League of
--- On Mon, 19/1/09, Michael Allan m...@zelea.com wrote:
Juho Laatu wrote:
If private and public opinions differ, then which
is the
manipulated one?
If they deviate it is hard to imagine
that the private opinion would not be
the sincere one.
That's because you are thinking
--- On Mon, 19/1/09, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.com wrote:
On Jan 18, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Juho Laatu wrote:
--- On Mon, 19/1/09, Jonathan Lundell
jlund...@pobox.com wrote:
- Why was the first set of definitions
not good enough for Approval? (I read
rank as referring to the
At 01:38 AM 1/18/2009, Juho Laatu wrote:
I don't quite see why ranking based
methods (Range, Approval) would not
follow the same principles/definitions
as rating based methods. The sincere
message of the voter was above that she
only slightly prefers B over A but the
strategic vote indicated
At 03:57 PM 1/18/2009, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Wouldn't it be stricter than this? Consider Range, for instance. One
would guess that the best zero info strategy is to vote Approval
style with the cutoff at some point (mean? not sure).
Actually, that's a lousy strategy. The reason it's
11 matches
Mail list logo
