Yes, it does bear some resemblance to A.Lomax's proxy ideas.
I too have devoted some thought to these ideas.
However, I suspect Lomax's ideas are better and Lanphier's worse. Or I
understand neither.
Specifically, as far as I understand it, with Lomax's proxies, you can
select anybody on the
Warren,
DH3 scenario with strategic votes by the A- and B-voters.
#voters
Their Vote
37
CA,BD
32
AD=B=C
31
BD=A=C
Aren't the A and B voters
I think free choice might be a little better than people's choice
as a term to describe how the proxy structure is created in Abd
Lomax's DP method. The proxy-client relationship is created by mutual
agreement of the proxy and the client.
As a political activist, I wish I had some special power
In your example of 3 main rival candidates (A, B, C) and one dark horse
candidate (D), you said that range voting prevented the dark horse from
winning. Graphically speaking, there would be a triangle formed by the
three main candidates , while the dark horse would lie somewhere outside
of it.
My
At 01:42 PM 8/26/2006, Warren Smith wrote:
Yes, it does bear some resemblance to A.Lomax's proxy ideas.
I too have devoted some thought to these ideas.
Warren, it should be noted, appears to have independently invented
Asset Voting, which is effectively a single-user delegable proxy (DP)
system
