Anyone interested in understanding what I am offering here had best ignore
anything Abd offers here:
He offers Free Associations, Asset voting, and Delegable Proxy. He
may have something of value, but I also claim value for my thoughts.
I offer proxies as a way of populating a legisl
At 09:36 PM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>Seeing Free Associations and Trees by Proxy as different concepts:
> Abd's Free Associations use proxies to create Free Associations,
>which decide for themselves what they are and do.
> My Trees by Proxy use proxies to elect legislatures, whi
At 01:36 PM 3/23/2007, Juho wrote:
>In my other mail I wondered what the intended use of the FA/DP is.
>These comments seem to point in the direction that FA/DP would be an
>"intelligence adding" preprocessing system that is independent of the
>actual political decision making process (but proxies
At 01:31 PM 3/23/2007, Juho wrote:
>Are you saying that FAs would not succumb to the old hazards?
Yes.
> I think
>it is probable that many FAs would drift towards more formal
>structures, strict leadership and rules (especially if the ideology
>that they promote makes that has a positive attitu
Seeing Free Associations and Trees by Proxy as different concepts:
Abd's Free Associations use proxies to create Free Associations,
which decide for themselves what they are and do.
My Trees by Proxy use proxies to elect legislatures, which then are
much like traditional legislatures.
Chris said:
In a way Approval is worse. In my example, the five AB compromisers
might correctly believe that A has at least as good a chance of winning as B
and that C has the least chance to win. They don't need to be
convinced that their favourite isn't viable, just (given their abhorrence
Ok, I think I'm pretty much on the same track with you - including
the fact that I don't have any detailed proposal available. Let's see
what the different concepts are good for and in under what conditions
they can be used.
Juho
On Mar 23, 2007, at 21:02 , Dave Ketchum wrote:
> I started
I started the Trees by Proxy thread March 18, in response to thoughts YOU
had expressed:
Abd has a new concept he calls Free Associations.
Responding to YOUR thoughts, I propose keeping traditional
legislature structures and responsibilities, doing the elections via proxy.
I do not p
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:23:05 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:56 AM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>> I suggest you look at Trees by Proxy as a better base for your thoughts.
>>
>> It provides for electing legislatures, such as boards of trustees or
>> elders, via continuous elections (
On Mar 23, 2007, at 17:23 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> "traditional powers and responsibilities" are appropriate, largely,
> for control structures, not for those which maximize intelligence.
> The proxy could end up being at the center of a natural caucus that
> contains significant number
On Mar 23, 2007, at 7:56 , Dave Ketchum wrote:
I suggest you look at Trees by Proxy as a better base for your
thoughts.
It provides for electing legislatures, such as boards of trustees
or elders, via continuous elections (proxies).
Unlike Free Associations, these have traditional powers
On Mar 23, 2007, at 5:00 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Setting aside the possible uses of proxies within formal power
structures -- which is actual practice in corporations and really
ought to receive more attention -- "formal parties," if organized
traditionally, have been tried over and ov
Michael Ossipoff wrote:
Chris:
> [Approval] is very vulnerable to disinformation campaigns
Mike:
> That’s a vague statement that could be said of many methods, including
> some that Chris likes.
Chris:
> My statement lacked details, but that doesn't make it "vague". I've
> elaborated t
At 01:56 AM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>I suggest you look at Trees by Proxy as a better base for your thoughts.
>
>It provides for electing legislatures, such as boards of trustees or
>elders, via continuous elections (proxies).
>
>Unlike Free Associations, these have traditional powers and re
Maybe there should be criteria for evaluating criteria. For instance, FARCS
doesnt pass the laugh test.
I consulted my JoAnn Q. Citizen consultant.
I said, Im going to tell you two criterion definitions. Theyre supposed
to be very similar, but they dont sound at all alike. Tell me which
>BUT, I can ALSO MUCH prefer A>B, and saying this plus A>Z and B>Z is
>beyond Approval's abilities, so I must ask for a more powerful method such
>as Condorcet.
Yes, it would give the best results, with our electorate, even in its first
election.
Milke Ossipoff
election-methods mailing
Chris had said:
> I'd be interested in seeing an example of MD failure that you agree (or
> are
> content) with.
>
> I replied:
:
>
> Id agree and be content with an example that doesnt violate SFC or
> SDSC.
Kevin then said:
Here is such an example. Suppose these are the sincere pr
17 matches
Mail list logo
