Juho,
--- Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> On Jul 29, 2007, at 2:51 , Kevin Venzke wrote:
>
> > Juho,
> >
> > Thanks for forwarding your old messages. I will comment on these
> > first.
> >
> > In the first two posts you discuss scenarios where equally-sized
> > factions
> > vote accordin
At 05:35 PM 7/30/2007, Juho wrote:
>Yes, a more detailed analysis should not rely on one axis only.
I'm not sure how many Warren's simulations use, but the simulator
doesn't just do even random distributions, which are unrealistic,
though interesting.
>The additional (utility/preference stren
At 05:35 PM 7/30/2007, Juho wrote:
>One possible definition of non-competitiveness is that voters
>strongly want such an alternative to win that the society considers
>best, not the one that they personally consider best.
Here is the problem. In a healthy society, people do want what is
best for
On Jul 30, 2007, at 2:08 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:17:29 -0400
>> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: Re: [Election-Methods] [EM] RV comments
>
>> By limiting ourselves to "competitive elections," we are limiting
>> o
On Jul 29, 2007, at 20:09 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 02:46 AM 7/29/2007, Juho wrote:
>> > 49 A
>> > 24 B
>> > 27 C>B
>>
>> The numbers of this example are so unlikely to occur in real life
>> that I modified the example a bit to get values that would be more
>> probable. This was the fir
On Jul 29, 2007, at 21:17 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:51 AM 7/29/2007, Juho wrote:
On Jul 22, 2007, at 6:58 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 08:17 AM 7/21/2007, Juho wrote:
>> I also think that Range is a good method in non-contentions
polls and
>> elections. But in the statement abo
