election-methods-list  

Messages by Date

• 1998/09/14 Re: Hang them high remedies Bart Ingles
• 1998/09/14 Re: Hang them high remedies Bart Ingles
• 1998/09/13 Re: Hang them high remedies David Catchpole
• 1998/09/13 Hang them high remedies DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/12 Germans vote for parties, not individuals - study (FWD) DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/12 Malta election results [FWD] DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/11 B is Condorcet winner Mike Ositoff
• 1998/09/11 2 truncation examples, margins Mike Ositoff
• 1998/09/09 Re: Truncation with Condorcet David Marsay
• 1998/09/08 Re: Schulze Method - Simpler Definition Norman Petry
• 1998/09/08 New Zealand PM Wins Confidence Vote (FWD) DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/07 Re: factions in NIreland's Assembly (FWD) Ken & Karla
• 1998/09/07 factions in NIreland's Assembly (FWD) DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/07 Re: Maltese Election Data & Analysis DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/07 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) David Marsay
• 1998/09/06 Re: Schulze Method - Simpler Definition Norman Petry
• 1998/09/05 Re: Schulze Method - Simpler Definition Norman Petry
• 1998/09/05 Re: Maltese Election Data & Analysis Norman Petry
• 1998/09/05 RE: Maltese Election Data & Analysis DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/05 Maltese Election Data & Analysis Norman Petry
• 1998/09/05 Re: Schulze Method - Simpler Definition Norman Petry
• 1998/09/04 Schulze Method - Simpler Definition Norman Petry
• 1998/09/03 Re: STV without Elimination David Catchpole
• 1998/09/03 RE: Explaining Schulze DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/03 RE: Explaining Schulze Blake Cretney
• 1998/09/03 Re: Tiebreaker Need David Marsay
• 1998/09/02 Ooops! Re: STV without Elimination (fwd) David Catchpole
• 1998/09/02 Re: STV without Elimination David Catchpole
• 1998/09/02 RE: STV without Elimination DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/02 RE: Explaining Schulze DEMOREP1
• 1998/09/02 STV without Elimination Norman Petry
• 1998/09/02 Explaining Schulze Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/31 Re: Maybe Schulze is decisive. Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/31 Re: Maybe Schulze is decisive. Norman Petry
• 1998/08/31 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/30 Goldfish, a remarkable advance Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/28 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/28 Beat-Path GMC is better of course Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/28 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/28 Re: Clone Independence Criteria Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/27 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) To: election-methods-list@eskimo.com Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/27 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/27 Re: Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/27 Re: Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives David Catchpole
• 1998/08/27 D'Hondt Formula Mardi Seng
• 1998/08/27 Re: Truncation with Condorcet David Marsay
• 1998/08/26 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Norman Petry
• 1998/08/26 Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives Norman Petry
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet, etc. DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/26 Patching Up Condorcet In Multi-Winner Elections (Oops!) David Catchpole
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) In-Reply-To: <DNODACCMMLEOFAAA@my-dejanews.com> David Catchpole
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) X-Sender-Ip: 199.175.107.34 Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 RE: election-methods-list@eskimo.com DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/26 RE: Condorcet and multi-winner elections DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet etc. DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9808261222.A17238-0100000@netcom14> David Catchpole
• 1998/08/26 Re: Tiebreaker Need Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 Tideman bad-example Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/26 Consistency Consequences Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/26 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 Re: Proposed SD Algorithm Defective Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) To: David Catchpole <s349436@student.uq.edu.au> Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/26 Tiebreaker Need Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/26 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/26 That's Probably SC Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/26 Clone Independence Criteria Norman Petry
• 1998/08/26 The Canadian Plan New Democracy
• 1998/08/26 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/26 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/25 Patching Up Condorcet In Multi-Winner Elections David Catchpole
• 1998/08/25 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/25 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Norman Petry
• 1998/08/25 Condorcet and multi-winner elections David Catchpole
• 1998/08/25 Re: Proposed SD Algorithm Defective David Catchpole
• 1998/08/25 Re: Random Ballot Tiebreaker Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/25 Re: Proposed SD Algorithm Defective Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/25 Re: Proposed SD Algorithm Defective Norman Petry
• 1998/08/25 Random Ballot Tiebreaker Norman Petry
• 1998/08/24 Re: Normative principles of elections- Condorcet and Irrelevance of Alternatives (plus a brief hello and an STV clarification) In-Reply-To: <199808250247.TAA08271@mx1.eskimo.com> David Catchpole
• 1998/08/13 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/12 Re: Goldfish (single-winner method) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/12 Goldfish (GMC) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/12 Goldfish (single-winner method) Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/12 Correction: PD (Pairwise Dropping) doesn't exist! Norman Petry
• 1998/08/12 Re: Condorcet Hell comment Bart Ingles
• 1998/08/10 Not As Bad As It Sounds! Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/10 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/10 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Norman Petry
• 1998/08/10 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/10 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/09 Re: Schulze: D>E 9 Bingo. Norman Petry
• 1998/08/09 Re: SD Smith Compliant Norman Petry
• 1998/08/09 SD Smith Compliant Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Blake C: Ranking Can Backfire Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Clone Compliance Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Schulze: D>E 9 Bingo. Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Re: Comparison of latest Condorcet Variants Norman Petry
• 1998/08/09 Re: Maybe None Clone-Independent Norman Petry
• 1998/08/09 Typo Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Maybe None Clone-Independent Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/09 Re: Criterion Clarification Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/08 Re: Comparison of latest Condorcet Variants Norman Petry
• 1998/08/08 Criterion Clarification Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/08 Re: Comparison of latest Condorcet Variants Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/08 Re: Truncation with Condorcet Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/08 Re: Truncation with Condorcet Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/08 Comparison of latest Condorcet Variants Norman Petry
• 1998/08/08 Re: Truncation with Condorcet DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/07 Re: Truncation with Condorcet Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/07 RE: Truncation with Condorcet DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/07 Re: Problems with Condorcet Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/07 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/07 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Norman Petry
• 1998/08/07 Re: Problems with Condorcet Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/07 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/07 Re: Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Norman Petry
• 1998/08/07 Re: Truncation with Condorcet Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/06 Re: Problems with Condorcet Bart Ingles
• 1998/08/06 Truncation with Condorcet Blake Cretney
• 1998/08/06 I vote for Condorcet's own proposal Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/06 Oops, it isn't Condorcet(EM) Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/06 1st Order Precedence method Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/06 Re: "Reverse-Tideman" Idea Explained Norman Petry
• 1998/08/06 Tiebreakers, Subcycle Rules Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/06 Re: Condocet Versions--some equivalent? Norman Petry
• 1998/08/05 Re: Problems with Condorcet Bart Ingles
• 1998/08/05 Correct Wording Of My Proposal Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/05 RE: Problems with Condorcet DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/05 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/05 RE: Bottoms-Up and STPV DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/05 Re: Problems with Condorcet Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/05 Re: Party List P.S. Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/05 Good-Working Method Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/05 Condocet Versions--some equivalent? Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/05 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze Norman Petry
• 1998/08/05 Re: California IRO proposal? :-| New Democracy
• 1998/08/05 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze Markus Schulze
• 1998/08/05 Re: Tideman Definition Different? David Marsay
• 1998/08/05 Re: Problems with Condorcet David Marsay
• 1998/08/05 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze David Marsay
• 1998/08/05 RE: Lowest YES tiebreaker DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/04 Re: Party List P.S. Saari
• 1998/08/04 Problems with Condorcet bartman
• 1998/08/04 Re: Always impossible! - not Saari
• 1998/08/04 "Reverse-Tideman" Idea Explained Norman Petry
• 1998/08/04 Bottoms-Up and STPV Norman Petry
• 1998/08/03 Re: House-Monotonicity Problem in Ranked STV -- an Example Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/03 Tideman & GMC Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/03 Re: Tideman Problem Norman Petry
• 1998/08/03 House-Monotonicity Problem in Ranked STV -- an Example Norman Petry
• 1998/08/03 California IRO proposal? :-| Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/03 1992, not 1922 Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/03 Tideman Definition Different? Mike Ositoff
• 1998/08/03 Lowest YES tiebreakers DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/03 Majority/Quota Combinations DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/02 Re: And all this leads too . . .? Rob Lanphier
• 1998/08/02 U.S. Election Data, 1920-1996 DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/01 Majority Beatpaths DEMOREP1
• 1998/08/01 typo Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/31 RE: Tideman vs. Schulze DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/31 Re: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/31 Re: And all this leads too . . .? Norman Petry
• 1998/07/31 Tideman Problem Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/31 Re: Vacancy Rule - STV cycles rule Norman Petry
• 1998/07/31 RE: And all this leads too . . .? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/31 And all this leads too . . .? Curtiss Brown
• 1998/07/31 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/31 Re: Vacancy Rule - STV cycles rule Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/31 Re: Tideman vs. Schulze Norman Petry
• 1998/07/29 Re: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/29 RE: STV is not house-monotonous! DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/29 RE: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/29 possible misunderstanding Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/29 RE: STV for party candidate lists? Markus Schulze
• 1998/07/28 Direct Democracy DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/28 RE: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/28 Re: Bottoms Up for Herman Beun Herman Beun
• 1998/07/28 Re: STV for party candidate lists? Markus Schulze
• 1998/07/28 Bottoms Up for Herman Beun New Democracy
• 1998/07/27 Refinement to Proposal Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/27 STV is not house-monotonous! Markus Schulze
• 1998/07/27 Re: STV for party candidate lists? Markus Schulze
• 1998/07/27 Re: STV for party candidate lists? Herman Beun
• 1998/07/25 RE: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/25 N minus 1 or Reverse Plurality DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/23 STV for party lists Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/22 RE: STV for party candidate lists? DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/22 Re: STV for party candidate lists? Herman Beun
• 1998/07/22 Re: STV for party candidate lists? Herman Beun
• 1998/07/22 Only About U.S. Greens Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/20 Re: nonmajoritarian disadvantages DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/20 Publicizing reform methods DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/18 Truncated Votes clue DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/18 Re: 1 to N and N/2 DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/18 Reversed Rankings DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/17 Re: Always impossible! - not Mike Ositoff
• 1998/07/17 Re: Always impossible! - not DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/16 1 to N and N/2 DEMOREP1
• 1998/07/16 $0,$1,$10,$100 Mike Ositoff

[Earlier messages] [Later messages]