On 30.6.2013, at 23.19, Benjamin Grant wrote:
I’ve been coming at understanding better the options and choices, merits and
flaws of various approaches to holding votes – mostly with the kind (and
sometimes not-so-kind) help of the people on this list.
However, a (I assume) basic thought
I'd like to propose an STV-like PR method that does without a quota.
Here is the procedure for filling 3 seats:
*Voters rank from the top however many candidates they wish.
To fill the first seat, one-at-time 'eliminate' the candidate highest-ranked
(among remaining candidates) on the fewest
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 02:16 PM 6/30/2013, David L Wetzell wrote:
I've argued that the combination of aspects of the US political system in
our constitution, namely the import of winner-take-all
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 09:22 AM 7/1/2013, David L Wetzell wrote:
Some thoughts.
1. You need to consider the difference between Cardinal and Ordinal
Utility.
You presume the existence of Cardinal utility.
First of all, who is
On 1.7.2013, at 23.12, Benjamin Grant wrote:
Thanks for everyone's candor and feedback. I can certainly appreciate how
annoying it is to deal with someone like myself that 1) is often asking
questions that everyone else had heard many times before and knows the
answer by heart, and 2) someone
Kristofer nailed it as usual, I have only one small point to add:
Let’s assume that we have a magical gift – a super power, if you will.
We can know exactly what each voter thinks about each candidate. Now,
because this comes from magic, it cannot unfortunately be used as a part
of the
At 01:26 PM 7/2/2013, David L Wetzell wrote:
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
At 02:16 PM 6/30/2013, David L Wetzell wrote:
I've argued that the combination of aspects of the US political
system in our constitution,
I'm just picking a couple of points from this mostly waste-of-time
post. I have not read all of it.
At 02:11 PM 7/2/2013, David L Wetzell wrote:
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
At 09:22 AM 7/1/2013, David L Wetzell
http://www.fairvote.org/lessons-from-burlington#.UdOvX2LE0XY (March 4, 2010)
Let me cut to the chase. Despite winning in five
of the citys seven wards, the use of instant
runoff voting (IRV) for mayor was repealed this
week by a margin of less than 4% in Vermonts
largest city of
Abd, I noticed something. I don't want to jump to any conclusions, so I'm
asking you directly.
2013/7/3 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
... Bucklin ...
You said Bucklin, not EMAV. So, two questions and a comment:
Q1. Why did you change?
Q2. Is there anything that would convince
10 matches
Mail list logo
