On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
I seem to be one of the few people on this list who recognizes that I
don't read voters' minds and cannot convert one vote-type to another
for voters.
Kathy, there was no reading of voter's minds. What was
Jonathan Lundell wrote:
On Feb 14, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
We may disagree with the counting method that is applied when
35:A 32:BC 33:C
occurs, but it seems very clear that the Condorcet winner in this
case is C, as you seem to agree with me in this case.
Yes. The A
Clearly there has been a lack of clarity in this thread. While others
may have made the mess you joined in, seems like you might have stated
your objections more clearly.
From IRV ballot pile and previous discussion of such piles, the
subject is IRV, a method that has rules.
Then there
At 01:59 PM 2/14/2010, Kathy Dopp wrote:
From: Chris Benham cbenha...@yahoo.com.au
35:A
32:BC
33:C,
by which I mean
35:AB=C
32:BCA
33:CA=B.
Kathy doesn't seem to recognize this, or maybe she does, but the two
statements are equivalent. By not ranking B and C, the voter
On Feb 14, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
We may disagree with the counting method that is applied when
35:A
32:BC
33:C
occurs, but it seems very clear that the Condorcet winner in this case
is C, as you seem to agree with me in this case.
Yes. The A voters express
From: Chris Benham cbenha...@yahoo.com.au
To: EM election-methods@lists.electorama.com
Rob LeGrand wrote (11 Feb 2010):
snip
35:A
32:BC
33:C,
by which I mean
35:AB=C
32:BCA
33:CA=B.
In this example, C is the Condorcet winner even though C does not have a
majority over B.? I can
Rob LeGrand wrote (11 Feb 2010):
snip
35:A
32:BC
33:C,
by which I mean
35:AB=C
32:BCA
33:CA=B.
In this example, C is the Condorcet winner even though C does not have a
majority over B. I can see how this example could be seen as an
embarrassment to the Condorcet criterion, in that a good
