On Mar 10, 2010, at 7:08 AM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
thanks, Chris. i will ponder this. i understand RP and (i think)
Schulze, at least how the mechanisms go, but i'll admit i haven't
been as invested in *how* to resolve cycles or *which* Condorcet
method is best as much as i am
Robert Bristow-Johnson wrote (9 March 2010):
snip
so, keeping RP, Schulze in mind for later, what would be a good
scheme for resolving cycles by use of elimination of candidates?
what would be a good (that is resistant to more anomalies) and
simple method to identify the weakest candidate
Chris Benham wrote:
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote (6 March 2010):
Another benefit to Ranked Pairs is that you don't have to confuse
matters with WV versus Margins.
snip
Kristofer,
Why is that?! That certainly is a benefit of Smith//Approval.
It's not the only method where you don't
Juho wrote:
On Mar 10, 2010, at 7:08 AM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
so, keeping RP, Schulze in mind for later, what would be a good
scheme for resolving cycles by use of elimination of candidates? what
would be a good (that is resistant to more anomalies) and simple
method to identify
On Mar 10, 2010, at 7:26 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Juho wrote:
On Mar 10, 2010, at 7:08 AM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
so, keeping RP, Schulze in mind for later, what would be a good
scheme for resolving cycles by use of elimination of candidates?
what would be a good (that
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Another approach to systems between proportional representation and the
two-party approach could be to have a proportional method but use districts
with only very few representatives (2, 3,...). That would provide rough but
in
On Mar 10, 2010, at 11:35 PM, Raph Frank wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Another approach to systems between proportional representation and
the
two-party approach could be to have a proportional method but use
districts
with only very few
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I didn't quite understand your question. The method could also be
non-party-list-based (like STV).
It depended on what you meant by 1/N of the votes. I was just
wondering if you were doing national level rebalancing, like MMP
Raph Frank Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 12:13 AM
I had a look at the 2008 House election results, and there
are a reasonable number of districts where one candidate got
more than 2/3, so maybe it isn't as big an issue as I
thought. OTOH, maybe it was that in those districts, the
On Mar 11, 2010, at 2:13 AM, Raph Frank wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Juho juho4...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I didn't quite understand your question. The method could also be
non-party-list-based (like STV).
It depended on what you meant by 1/N of the votes. I was just
wondering if you
10 matches
Mail list logo
