Hello James,
I am Thomas from Germany. Sorry if my English is a bit strange. I am
also a member of the Votorola-Project. I like very much, that you are
doing theoretical work on this subject. As far as I'm aware, this is
quite needed.
In your paper you write about the one benefit of
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Dave Ketchum da...@clarityconnect.com wrote:
Write-ins permitted (if few write-ins expected,
counters may lump all such as if a single candidate - if assumption correct
the count verifies it; if incorrect, must recount).
How do you handle write-ins. Are
On Apr 8, 2010, at 5:57 AM, Raph Frank wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Dave Ketchum da...@clarityconnect.com
wrote:
Write-ins permitted (if few write-ins expected,
counters may lump all such as if a single candidate - if assumption
correct
the count verifies it; if incorrect, must
On Apr 8, 2010, at 3:29 AM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Apr 7, 2010, at 6:25 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
This is some thought about keeping it simple, yet doable.
I will lean toward Ranked Pairs with margins,
not sure what with margins does.
There are different approaches to determining
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:29 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Apr 7, 2010, at 6:25 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
This is some thought about keeping it simple, yet doable.
I will lean toward Ranked Pairs with margins,
not sure what with margins does. i'll read below...
vs comparing per winning
At 05:57 AM 4/8/2010, Raph Frank wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Dave Ketchum
da...@clarityconnect.com wrote:
Write-ins permitted (if few write-ins expected,
counters may lump all such as if a single candidate - if assumption correct
the count verifies it; if incorrect, must
On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:29 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Apr 7, 2010, at 6:25 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
This is some thought about keeping it simple, yet doable.
I will lean toward Ranked Pairs with margins,
not sure what with margins
On Apr 8, 2010, at 10:30 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
i do not know why anyone would back the winning votes metric for
beat strength.
I guess the main driver has been that winning votes is more tolerant
than margins against strategic burying in some scenarios. (There are
however
Hi,
--- En date de : Jeu 8.4.10, robert bristow-johnson r...@audioimagination.com
a écrit :
Juho just explained it, so now i know (earlier i had
wondered if margins was a normalized or percentage beat
strength). i've always thought that the Tideman RP was
*only* framed in terms of margins.
On Apr 8, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
I more or less despise the election of A in this scenario:
49 A
24 B
27 CB
I believe the possibility of this outcome is a disincentive for a
candidate
like C to run.
The story behind these votes seems to be that C is ideologically close
Being the you that Raph was addressing, I offer what I was proposing.
As the subject indicates, the topic is Condorcet voting. Also,
listing a candidate who is on the ballot, and could be voted for as
such, should be counted as a misdeed - such could be voted for in the
normal manner
Hi Juho,
--- En date de : Jeu 8.4.10, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk a écrit :
I more or less despise the election of A in this
scenario:
49 A
24 B
27 CB
I believe the possibility of this outcome is a
disincentive for a candidate
like C to run.
The story behind these votes seems
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:03 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Hi Juho,
--- En date de : Jeu 8.4.10, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk a écrit :
I more or less despise the election of A in this
scenario:
49 A
24 B
27 CB
I believe the possibility of this outcome is a
disincentive for a candidate
like C to run.
Hi Dave,
--- En date de : Jeu 8.4.10, Dave Ketchum da...@clarityconnect.com a écrit :
--- En date de : Jeu 8.4.10, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk
a écrit :
I more or less despise the election of A in
this
scenario:
49 A
24 B
27 CB
I believe the possibility of this outcome is
a
14 matches
Mail list logo
