Dave Ketchum wrote:
Real topic here is whether you MEAN secret when you use the word...
Scout's honour - when I say 'secret', I mean secret. The vote is
anonymous. The voter's identity is undisclosed. All that good stuff,
just like a traditional secret ballot. 8^)
From Wikipedia, the free
--- On Mon, 26/1/09, James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk wrote:
Juho Laatu Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 12:29 AM
What I mean is that decision making
is such a natural part of everyday
life that people are very used to
that. Often they even enjoy making
decisions (e.g. when
--- On Mon, 26/1/09, Raph Frank raph...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Juho Laatu
juho4...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Another approach to offering more
flexibility (maybe not needed) and
more strategy options (maybe not
wanted) is to allow the voter to
fill the pairwise
--- On Mon, 26/1/09, Michael Allan m...@zelea.com wrote:
Two
specialized voting systems that intercommunicate (state and
public)
can give better results than one system, on its own.
There are both positive and negative factors.
The public vote is maybe more
sincere
in the sense that
Yes, cyclic votes are not very rational
nor required. Also some preference
strengths may be illogical (e.g. when
opinion AC is weaker than either of
AB and BC).
In competitive elections weak opinions
may often not be needed in general.
Juho
--- On Tue, 27/1/09, Kristofer Munsterhjelm
I had written:
I do not even think about putting all the
remaining options into any
order of preference, much less attempt it.
Juho Laatu Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:24 PM
Same with me. It is however probably not
a big problem for you to pick some other
product if your favourite
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:25:57 -0500 Michael Allan wrote:
Dave Ketchum wrote:
Real topic here is whether you MEAN secret when you use the word...
Scout's honour - when I say 'secret', I mean secret. The vote is
anonymous. The voter's identity is undisclosed. All that good stuff,
just like
Kathy,
Would you explain what you mean by unequal treatment?
Thanks,
- Jan
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Kathy Dopp kathy.d...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI, I believe that this appeal by plaintiffs will prevail and I hope
that will put an end to IRV/STV in the U.S. I haven't seen a copy of
the
Dave Ketchum wrote:
Yes and no. What we're discussing is described in the original post,
at the top of the thread. The terms are defined there. Is anything
unclear there?
When? Anyway:
Sorry? When was it posted? Jan 6:
