election-methods  

Messages by Date

• 2005/12/28 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/28 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Simmons, Forest
• 2005/12/27 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Ken Kuhlman
• 2005/12/26 Re: [EM] Correlation methods (was Correlated Instant Borda Runoff) Simmons, Forest
• 2005/12/26 Re: [EM] Updated article rob brown
• 2005/12/25 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/25 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Abd ulRahman Lomax
• 2005/12/25 Re: [EM] [instantrunoff] plurality isn't so bad Jeremy Friesner
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Updated article Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Updated article rob brown
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium rob brown
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium rob brown
• 2005/12/24 Re: [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/24 [EM] Group strategy (was Re: Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium) Steve Eppley
• 2005/12/23 [EM] Approval Voting elections don't always have an equilibrium Jan Kok
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Updated article Jan Kok
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Simmons, Forest
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Dan Bishop
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Chris Benham
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] plurality isn't so bad Bob Richard
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Ken Kuhlman
• 2005/12/23 [EM] Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, without Borda Dan Bishop
• 2005/12/23 Re: [EM] plurality isn't so bad Dave Ketchum
• 2005/12/23 [EM] Updated article rob brown
• 2005/12/22 Re: [EM] plurality isn't so bad rob brown
• 2005/12/22 [EM] plurality isn't so bad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
• 2005/12/21 Re: [EM] [instantrunoff] Eugene, OR: 'Top Two' ballot method would restrict choice Dave Ketchum
• 2005/12/21 [EM] interpolated median rob brown
• 2005/12/21 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting rob brown
• 2005/12/21 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting Yves Dandurand
• 2005/12/21 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting rob brown
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] some questions about utility Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting rob brown
• 2005/12/20 [EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] some questions about utility James Gilmour
• 2005/12/20 Re: [EM] some questions about utility Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/20 [EM] some questions about utility Stephen Turner
• 2005/12/19 [EM] Benham's pairwise margins FBC method Warren Smith
• 2005/12/19 Re: [EM] [ER] FBC-complying Margins-like method (?) Chris Benham
• 2005/12/19 Re: [EM] [ER] FBC-complying Margins-like method (?) Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/19 [EM] [ER] FBC-complying Margins-like method (?) Chris Benham
• 2005/12/19 Re: [EM] Strategy free method proposal rob brown
• 2005/12/17 Re: [EM] Strategy free method proposal Simmons, Forest
• 2005/12/15 Re: [EM] Strategy free method proposal rob brown
• 2005/12/15 [EM] Strategy free method proposal rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 [EM] #ballots with both truncation and equalities allowed - correction Warren Smith
• 2005/12/14 [EM] #ballots with both truncation and equalities allowed - correction Warren Smith
• 2005/12/14 [EM] #ballots with both truncation and equalities allowed Warren Smith
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] counting ballots Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 [EM] counting ballots Warren Smith
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Jobst Heitzig
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Jobst Heitzig
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates James Gilmour
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/14 Re: [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/14 [EM] number of possible ranked ballots given N candidates rob brown
• 2005/12/13 Re: [EM] history of random component in government Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/13 [EM] history of random component in government Stephen Turner
• 2005/12/12 Re: [EM] Two approval ballot methods... (small error) Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/12 Re: [EM] Two approval ballot methods using approval opposition Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] Two approval ballot methods using approval opposition Chris Benham
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] range voting fix try #2 by Rob Brown Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] two "new" hybrid approval-ranking methods by Brams & Sanver Dgamble997
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] two "new" hybrid approval-ranking methods by Brams & Sanver Chris Benham
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] two "new" hybrid approval-ranking methods by Brams & Sanver Dgamble997
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown
• 2005/12/11 Re: [EM] range voting fix try #2 by Rob Brown rob brown
• 2005/12/10 [EM] Two approval ballot methods using approval opposition Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] range voting fix try #2 by Rob Brown Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/10 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/10 [EM] Approval and cycles rob brown
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] range voting fix try #2 by Rob Brown rob brown
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/09 [EM] Brams-Sanver Warren Smith
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Rob LeGrand
• 2005/12/09 [EM] range voting fix try #2 by Rob Brown Warren Smith
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/09 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/08 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/08 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/08 Re: [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/08 [EM] Alright, next try. Range voting fix, version 2. rob brown
• 2005/12/08 Re: [EM] two new hybrid approval-ranking methods by Brams & Sanver Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/08 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting James Gilmour
• 2005/12/07 [EM] two new hybrid approval-ranking methods by Brams & Sanver Warren Smith
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] 10% as much as possible... :) rob brown
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Rob Brown's "repair" of range voting rob brown
• 2005/12/07 [EM] 10% as much as possible... :) Warren Smith
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Rob Brown's "repair" of range voting Eric Gorr
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Rob Brown's "repair" of range voting Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Voting puzzle page now available at CRV Eric Gorr
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Voting puzzle page now available at CRV Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] reply to Venzke's confusion (small correction) Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] reply to Venzke's confusion Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Fixing Range Voting Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Voting puzzle page now available at CRV Scott Ritchie
• 2005/12/07 Re: [EM] Rob Brown's "repair" of range voting rob brown
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/06 [EM] oops Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 [EM] Rob Brown's "repair" of range voting Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Chris Benham
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] Fixing Range Voting rob brown
• 2005/12/06 [EM] yet MORE massive confusion by Venzke: Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 [EM] reply to Venzke's confusion Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] Advantage of MDDA over Approval? Anthony Duff
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] Fixing Range Voting Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] Fixing Range Voting Eric Gorr
• 2005/12/06 [EM] Fixing Range Voting rob brown
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] range voting - strength of feeling James Gilmour
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] More results about... correction Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] More results about computer simulations of elections pt 2 Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] Advantage of MDDA over Approval? Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] More results about computer simulations of elections Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/06 [EM] Advantage of MDDA over Approval? Jan Kok
• 2005/12/06 [EM] Voting puzzle page now available at CRV Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 [EM] range voting - strength of feeling Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" James Gilmour
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown
• 2005/12/06 [EM] More results about computer simulations of elections - without need of a computer! Warren Smith
• 2005/12/06 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" James Gilmour
• 2005/12/05 [EM] election-methods@electorama.com Warren Smith
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Dan Bishop
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] reply to venzke re utility, approval, range Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Dan Bishop
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/05 [EM] reply to venzke re utility, approval, range Warren Smith
• 2005/12/05 [EM] Fwd: Re: Why Utility is more important than "transvestite Inversion Property" - reply to Venzke, Gilmour cbenhamau
• 2005/12/05 Re: [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/05 [EM] question re: converting ballots into a matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/04 Re: [EM] Upgrading wiki.electorama.com Rob Lanphier
• 2005/12/04 Re: [EM] election-methods Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7 Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/04 [EM] Upgrading wiki.electorama.com Rob Lanphier
• 2005/12/04 [EM] Fwd: Re: Why Utility is more important than "transvestite Inversion Property" - reply to Venzke, Gilmour cbenhamau
• 2005/12/04 Re: [EM] election-methods Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7 James Gilmour
• 2005/12/04 Re: [EM] election-methods Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7 Warren Smith
• 2005/12/03 Re: [EM] range voting mind-bogglingly stupid? (Reply to Rob Brown re voter strategy) rob brown
• 2005/12/03 Re: [EM] Why Utility is more important than "transvestite Inversion Property" - reply to Venzke, Gilmour James Gilmour
• 2005/12/03 Re: [EM] Why Utility is more important - reply to Venzke, Gilmour Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/03 [EM] Why Utility is more important than "transvestite Inversion Property" - reply to Venzke, Gilmour Warren Smith
• 2005/12/03 [EM] range voting mind-bogglingly stupid? (Reply to Rob Brown re voter strategy) Warren Smith
• 2005/12/03 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" James Gilmour
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix rob brown
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix Paul Kislanko
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Kevin Venzke
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix Dave Ketchum
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting rob brown
• 2005/12/02 Re: [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting James Gilmour
• 2005/12/02 [EM] reply to Gilmour attack on range voting & social utility; CCd to RangeVoting Warren Smith
• 2005/12/01 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown
• 2005/12/01 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown
• 2005/12/01 Re: [EM] ignoring "strength of opinion" rob brown

• Earlier messages
• Later messages