Juho Laatu Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:12 PM
On 4.8.2011, at 14.21, James Gilmour wrote:
There is only one real issue in elections: representation of the
voters.
If in a single winner partisan election the voters vote 51% for A and
49% for B, we have a major problem in
I was also looking for pure proportional representation. The compromise
decisions would take place after the election in a representative body or in a
government. The election methods need not be tampered. My theory was just that
in the case that the majority (of parties) that forms the
: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf Of Juho Laatu
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:38 PM
To: EM list
Subject: Re: [EM] Record activity on the EM list?
I was also looking for pure proportional representation
...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf Of Juho Laatu
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:38 PM
To: EM list
Subject: Re: [EM] Record activity on the EM list?
I was also looking for pure proportional representation. The
compromise decisions would
Yes, there are areas where single-winner methods are more challenging. For
example multi-winner STV works better than single-winner STV, and it is easier
to collect sincere ratings in multi-winner methods than in single-winner
methods. On the other hand the field of study may be wider in
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf Of Juho Laatu
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 7:07 AM
To: EM list
Subject: Re: [EM] Record activity on the EM list?
Yes, there are areas where single-winner methods are more
challenging. For example multi-winner STV
2011/8/3 Juho Laatu juho4...@yahoo.co.uk
I noticed that there was a lot of activity on the multi-winner side.
Earlier I have even complained about the lack of interest in multi-winner
methods. Now there are still some interesting but unread mails in my inbox.
Multi-winner methods are, if
Hi Jameson,
I like the slate-nominating feature it requires the nominators of the
slates to think about the best composition of the council and not about
their candidates.
This encourages deliberation and discussion across partisan borders, I
imagine, in order to find the perfect mix.
Slate
2011/8/3 Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com
Hi Jameson,
I like the slate-nominating feature it requires the nominators of the
slates to think about the best composition of the council and not about
their candidates.
This encourages deliberation and discussion across partisan borders, I
Juho Laatu Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:04 AM
Multi-winner methods are, if possible, even more complicated
than single-winner methods.
I disagree. It is much easier to obtain a satisfactory (representative,
acceptable) outcome for a multi-winner election than it
is to obtain a
This method looks like one pretty natural way of measuring who should be
elected.
The privacy concerns are a problem in some environments but not all. This
method could thus well suit for some real-world use (if privacy in not a
problem or if voting machines or vote counters can be trusted).
Towards the end of July, I noticed that I had to scroll down a long ways in the
archive to get to the most
recent messages.
I wonder if we set some kind of record.
If we were approaching or receding from a major election, it would be more
understandable.
Maybe all of the feisty guys are
On 8/2/11 8:48 PM, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
Towards the end of July, I noticed that I had to scroll down a long ways in the
archive to get to the most
recent messages.
I wonder if we set some kind of record.
If we were approaching or receding from a major election, it would be more
I noticed that there was a lot of activity on the multi-winner side. Earlier I
have even complained about the lack of interest in multi-winner methods. Now
there are still some interesting but unread mails in my inbox.
Multi-winner methods are, if possible, even more complicated than
14 matches
Mail list logo
