of the difference between the EC and direct
election. It is the only difference in the outcomes, and if
it's not a benefit, then the EC has no benefits at all.
Tony Simmons wrote:
From: Richard Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Are voters in larger or smaller states more powerful
From: Richard Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Are voters in larger or smaller states more powerful?
Richard,
Just an observation: There are some people who post stuff on
the Internet that isn't, um, quite valid. I suppose you've
seen or at least heard of the proofs that NASA faked
From: Forest Simmons
Subject: Re: [EM] Quitting list after a few final replies.
Dear Mike,
I 'm sure that I speak for many others when I say that I
am sorry to hear that you feel a need to unsubscribe from
the EM list.
*All* of us, I would imagine. It is wonderful to have such
expertise
From: Forest Simmons
Subject: Re: [EM] Thoughts on majority potential simulations
Tony,
Your comments below remind me that it would be interesting
to do a singular value analysis to find the effective
dimension of the issue space. Just throw out the
dimensions corresponding to
From: Craig Carey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 2001-04-12 19:09 +0100 Thursday, Martin Harper wrote:
[snip]
What have I missed? Something important clearly...
I decline to answer. I am quitting.
Thank you.
This list has subscribers that appear to be very stupid.
From: MIKE OSSIPOFF
Subject: [EM] no primary
Anthony wrote:
In other words, two
round runoff. No more primary.
Not that big a change.
I reply:
Getting rid of the primary and switching from Plurality to
Runoff are big changes. [...]
You left out some things. The plan that was
From: Forest Simmons
Subject: Re: [EM] One vote per voter
Another way to look at Approval in terms of
one vote per voter:
Suppose there are N candidates. Count each
approval as exactly one Nth of a point. That
way no man can vote a total of more than one
point. (And he's a fool to vote
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 23:52:28 +0100
From: Martin Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Spoilers
Tony Simmons wrote:
From: Martin Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Spoilers
Just what exactly is "sincere approval" in
this case? How do I measure it
From: Forest Simmons
Subject: Re: [EM] One vote per voter
If I'm not mistaken, the slogan "one man, one
vote" reached its pinnacle in the context of
reapportionment. Up until the Baker vs ( ? )
decision of the Supreme Court some urban
congressional districts had populations
several times
From: Joe Weinstein
Subject: Re: Condorcet vs Approval
For me, Condorcet breaks down at the very beginning, in
the simplest case, a 2-candidate contest between A and B,
where Condorcet Winner A beats B over a majority of the
voters by very shallow preference, but B beats A over the
111 ABC
110 DE
101 F
100 GHIJ
011 KLMNOP
010 QRS
001 TUVW
000 XYZ
In the second representation, the score would be the place
of the most significant digit in which the two binary
labels differ.
Oops, this means that there's a whopping difference between
100 and 011, merely because of
Forest,
I found your scheme fascinating, and it worked with an
example or two I tried it with.
For three candidates, we first select one who wins
conventional IRV, and who we can figure is unlikely to be the
CL. We're not sure, but that isn't necessary, since the
principal purpose of this step
12 matches
Mail list logo
