I was thinking about corporate elections today, and how under some
voting systems an individual would want to strategically vote by
submitting multiple, different ballots. I soon realized that this was
generalizable to multiple voters with identical preferences in any
election.
Basically, somethi
On Dec 12, 2006, at 9:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mostly I've independently verified the results, but I've added my
> favorite pet method, Instant Runoff Normalized Ratings (IRNR) into
> the mix.
When you say you average results, does that mean you mix the colour ?
For any two consecutive integers, a and b, Bias-Free's round-off point is:
(b to the b power divided by a to the a power), all divided by e.
When I posted that formula before, the "^" wasn't available, or I didn't
find it. Using that character, Bias-Free's round-off point is:
(b^b/a^a
With the Bias-Free method, because, in every cycle, there is no net dS/q,
that means that, any two states, in any two cycles, even at opposite ends of
the population range, will never have any difference in their
seats-per-quota expectation. Bias-Free is genuinely entirely unbiased.
That m
Also, what is interesting is that condorcet has alot less noise than max
utility.
I guess this is due to median being more resistant to noise than average.
Raphfrk
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"
www.wikocracy.com
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ka-Ping Ye did some excellent work
>
> The original is here, and was discussed on this list many months ago:
> http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
Yeah, it's cool.
> Mostly I've independently verified the results, but I've added my
> favorite pet method, Instant Runoff
