capologist wrote:
See section 5 of my paper:
Not quite what I'm looking for. That section describes a
non-deterministic method for generating a complete linear order.
I don't require a linear order. I'm OK with a partial ordering.
I'm looking for a deterministic method for generating a
Jameson Quinn wrote:
2011/10/25 Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_el...@lavabit.com
mailto:km_el...@lavabit.com
Jameson Quinn wrote:
* A multimember-district system helps with the above
problems, but
doesn't actually solve them. Who wants a system where
Dear Juho, Fred and others,
I discovered something in history that enabled me to include formal
equality in the thesis, along with electoral power. I post an
expanded abstract/outline for critique. Can anyone see a weak point
in the reasoning here?
An individual vote in an election has no
Interesting, but not relevant to what Kristofer had actually written. Finland
uses a party-list voting system - Kristopher was
writing about STV, and specifically about 5-member districts.
James
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
I just wanted to point out that actually one can come from open lists towards
STV, and from STV towards a party based system with multiple candidates and end
up pretty much at the same point.
Juho
On 29.10.2011, at 20.21, James Gilmour wrote:
Interesting, but not relevant to what Kristofer
On Oct 29, 2011, at 12:29 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
you could (for instance) break them in Ranked Pairs order.
A Ranked Pairs tiebreak is fully deterministic. Sort the victories in order
of magnitude, then if M1 M2 comes before M2 M1, set M1 above M2. It may
feel hackish to
