Re: [EM] DYN
These methods offer quite interesting and quite radical horse trading possibilities. The previous version (without the published rankings limitation) is so flexible that it is hard to even imagine what kind of trading would take place. In the version below it is possible e.g. that some extreme candidates would trade votes and thereby get some advantage over the centrist ones. It is also an option not to allow trading at all but just to allow the candidates to set their approval cutoff where they want (in line with the ranking order). One more option would be to allow the voters to cast ranked votes and donate the whole vote to one candidate that would then be allowed to put the approval cutoff in those votes in the most appropriate position. Juho On Jul 12, 2007, at 21:22 , Forest W Simmons wrote: In further response to Juho's question about candidates making their approval choices before versus after the partial count, here's a compromise: Require the candidates to publish their candidate rankings before the election, and then (after the partial info is available to them) require them to make approvals consistent with their rankings, so that they can approve A without approving B only if B is not ranked ahead of A on their published list. Forest election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info ___ Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" The Wall Street Journal http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Re: [EM] DYN
In further response to Juho's question about candidates making their approval choices before versus after the partial count, here's a compromise: Require the candidates to publish their candidate rankings before the election, and then (after the partial info is available to them) require them to make approvals consistent with their rankings, so that they can approve A without approving B only if B is not ranked ahead of A on their published list. Forest election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Re: [EM] DYN
True, it would be confusing to explain DYN as a form of asset voting, but it could be done. Here is its purest form: Each voter gets one vote per candidate. The voter delegates each vote to a candidate (the one that she wants to make responsible for getting a Y or N attached to that vote). If you want a sure Y, then delegate it to the candidate in question. If you want a sure N, delegate it to the candidate's strongest enemy. Each ballot is encoded as a square matrix of zeros and ones. If the row i column j entry is a one, then on that ballot the Y/N decision regarding candidate i has been delegated to candidate j. After these matrices have been summed, each proxy has a multiset of votes (the respective columns of the sum, so interpreted). The elements of these multisets are subject to horse trading. When the horse trading is finished, the proxies decide the Y/N status of each of the votes for which they have become responsible. The candidate with the greatest number of Y's is elected. Check: for each candidate the sum of the Y's and N's should be the same, namely the total number of ballots. Forest Warren Smith wrote: >see >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RangeVoting/message/5389 >-- >Warren D. Smith >http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking >"endorse" as 1st step) >and >math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Re: [EM] DYN
Why "after"? (Is this somehow essential? Will they change their opinions based on the "partial results"? Are they supposed to reflect the general opinion more than their own opinion?) How about announcing the content of the proxy votes already before the votes are counted, or maybe already before the election? If the votes are counted "after", will each proxy know the number of delegated votes that other proxies have (or the number of his/her own delegated votes) before they cast their proxy votes? Juho On Jul 10, 2007, at 2:21 , Forest W Simmons wrote: > Delegable Yes/No: > > Each voter has a Yes/No vote to cast for each candidate. The voters > can delegate some of these votes to candidates (including write-ins), > if they so desire. The candidates cast the delegated votes after the > rest of the votes have already been counted. > > Thus the voters that have strong feelings about certain candidates can > vote for or against them, and delegate their remaining votes to their > proxies, who will then have some firm partial results to inform their > strategies. > > Forest > > > > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for > list info ___ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
[EM] DYN
Delegable Yes/No: Each voter has a Yes/No vote to cast for each candidate. The voters can delegate some of these votes to candidates (including write-ins), if they so desire. The candidates cast the delegated votes after the rest of the votes have already been counted. Thus the voters that have strong feelings about certain candidates can vote for or against them, and delegate their remaining votes to their proxies, who will then have some firm partial results to inform their strategies. Forest election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
