Juho Laatu wrote:
(I limit the scope of discussion to
single-winner elections, and exlude
primaries and other party internal
candidate selection and hierarchical
proxy based methods.)
. . .
One approach is to use a candidate
tree where the votes (to individual
candidates) are summed
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Juho Laatu wrote:
One approach is to use a candidate
tree...
One could also have a series of runoffs...
Instead of a parallel of runoffs, which is the tree.
Fred's method could be used to select a single winner. Would you call it a
hierarchical proxy? ...
--- On Fri, 6/3/09, Kristofer Munsterhjelm km-el...@broadpark.no wrote:
Juho Laatu wrote:
Is the target here to have a method
that would allow and encourage having
multiple candidates? (to allow the
people of Owego to select the winner
themselves instead of others/parties
telling
Is the target here to have a method
that would allow and encourage having
multiple candidates? (to allow the
people of Owego to select the winner
themselves instead of others/parties
telling them what their choices are)
This can be taken as an independent
challenge. Which methods / systems
lead
