Hi Abd ul-Rahman,
I realize I wasn't being fair to you on the applicability of Delegable
Proxy (DP).
I'll be referring to my system as "PH", for "proportional hierarchy".
More inline:
On Sat, 2006-08-26 at 23:23 -0400, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> But, it hit me, what if, instead of a fixed str
Hi Brian,
I think you're in the ballpark of understanding the problem I'm trying
to solve. More below...
On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:42 -0700, Brian Olson wrote:
> I'm still hoping kos will let me use my
> implementation of election methods in perl (
> http://bolson.org/voting/vote_util/perl/ )
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 23:14 -0400, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 09:55 PM 8/23/2006, Rob Lanphier wrote:
>
> >My solution would be to come up with a hierarchical filtering
> >mechanism, where all users are placed (via election method described
> >below) in small gro
Hi all,
I've been mulling over an idea for a while, and I've finally taken the
time to write it down.
The problem that inspired me to think about this is my casual
involvement at Daily Kos, which is a popular political discussion
site. I find the sheer number of diaries and comments positively
o
Hi all,
The reason why the naming of "instant runoff voting" is such appealing
marketing is because it paints a false picture. I think people often
think they are getting the equivalent of a hierarchical tournament when
they advocate IRV.
Take the Tennessee example here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/
Hi Dave,
I think you're right that examples like the version you constructed need
to be pointed out. A similar breakdown occurs in the "Tennessee
example" on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_different_voting_systems_under_similar_circumstances
In both examples, the second-to-la
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 17:10 -0500, Paul Kislanko wrote:
> > Most other signatories implemented that part of the Berne Convention
> > well before the USA did, given that the original Convention was signed
> > in _18_86.
>
> I cited only US Copyright Law. And you quoted my copyrighted text without
>
Hi all,
As some of you may be aware, we've had a policy of only allowing
subscriber emails to automatically pass through to the list. However,
for non-subscribers, we've held those posts for review. In the past,
the ratio was something like 100 spams per 1 legitimate email. Pretty
bad, but mana
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 18:03 -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> I'm upgrading wiki.electorama.com tonight, so there's going to be some
> downtime, starting very soon. I should be done fooling with it later
> tonight.
Back online. Changes:
1. Upgraded from 1.4.11 to 1.5.3. This
Hi folks,
I'm upgrading wiki.electorama.com tonight, so there's going to be some
downtime, starting very soon. I should be done fooling with it later
tonight.
Rob
election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Very cool!
I notice that there's no explicit redistribution license listed on these
files. Are you planning on licensing them for use in open source
software (e.g. Electowidget)?
Rob
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 20:44 -0800, rob brown wrote:
> I made a start at some stuff to do improved output for con
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 20:34 +, Rob Brown wrote:
> Kevin Venzke yahoo.fr> writes:
> > Beatpath(wv) satisfies clone independence, monotonicity,
> > plurality, minimal defense, Condorcet Loser, Local IIA,
> > always elects from Schwartz, always elects from the CDTT..
> > It'll be very hard to mee
On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 17:59 -0800, rob brown wrote:
> I was confusing a Condorcet tie with a tie for the number of pairwise
> victories. I blame this article for my confusion :)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copeland%27s_method
> ... where it seems to imply that they are the same thing ("This
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 16:50 -0800, Simmons, Forest wrote:
> There are many uses for election methods besides public election
> proposals. They are used in various sports contexts, pattern
> recognition software, search engines, etc. [...] If you want to stay
> in your tiny little public proposal
I've modified Electowidget and deployed on wikitest.
Changes:
* Fixed plurality bugs
* Spiffed up output of methods with single dimensional score arrays
(plurality, IRV, Range, Approval)
* Added average rating to Range detailed output
These changes will be in the next version of Electowidget.
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the feedback. Comments below:
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 17:10 +0100, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> I voted. I don't quite understand the pairwise matrix. If the method
> is Schulze(wv), how can there be negative numbers in it?
That was a minor tweak I made to make debugging easier. By
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 10:16 -0500, Warren Smith wrote:
> --suggestion:
> As both a test of your software, and as a public service and help to me,
> could you run all the Debian elections using all (or at least a lot of)
> methods?
> Hyperlinks to the debian elections at
> http://math.temple.e
Hi Warren,
Thanks for checking it out. Comments inline.
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 15:22 -0500, Warren Smith wrote:
> first, it wants me to "log in" which I do not know how to do, in
> order to vote.
There's a couple of places where you might see that text. One was
already a hyperlink, the other wa
Hi folks,
I'm trying to run a single-winner poll using Electowidget, and I'm
hoping you can help in constructing the poll.
Here's the poll:
http://wikitest.electorama.com/wiki/Election:Method_support_poll
You'll need to log into the wiki to vote. If you have an account on
Electowiki, it was pro
Hi folks,
I'm proud to announce the first release of Electowidget, a plugin for
MediaWiki:
http://electorama.com/electowidget
Electowidget is designed to be an extremely flexible framework for
implementing many different web-based ballot designs, election tallying
methods, and output formats. S
On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 17:36 -0500, Paul Kislanko wrote:
> My "discomfort" (can't quite call it a criticism) with any method that
> counts votes using the pairwise matrix is that my "A (1st) > B (5th)" vote
> in a 4-way race is negated by some other voter's "B (fourth) > A (fifth)"
> vote. Neither o
On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 02:11 +, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
> It's been suggested that SFC should have a different name. I wouldn't want
> to rename it now, becuse it's already known by the name SFC. But what would
> be another good name?:
>
> Condorcet's Criterion for Plausible Opponents (CCPO)
>
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 22:47 +0200, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> I don't know of a way to weaken LNHarm which would still result in a guarantee
> that voters could "take to the bank."
My hope would be that we can come up with a system where voters could
feel comfortable ranking all but one of the viable c
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the reply.
I'll have to think about some elements of your mail, but there are
pieces I want to respond to right away.
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 05:55 +0200, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> --- Rob Lanphier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> > Here's a related s
On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 10:58 -0400, Warren Smith wrote:
> I did not say voters always want full rankings.
>
> What I said was, I think there is a substantial SUBCLASS of elections,
> in which, all voters (except perhaps for a few who are insane or writing
> illegible ballots or something random lik
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 11:30 -0700, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 11:38 -0400, Warren Smith wrote:
> > I edited the
> > http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Instant_Runoff_Normalized_Ratings
> > page, but this revealed a bug - installer falied to install Te
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 11:38 -0400, Warren Smith wrote:
> I edited the http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Instant_Runoff_Normalized_Ratings
> page, but this revealed a bug - installer falied to install TeX - see said
> URL.
We're all in luck. Previously, I hadn't set up TeX support because it
promis
27 matches
Mail list logo
