--- On Mon, 8/18/08, Raph Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you are aiming for CPO-STV.
Not really. My system is obviously influenced by CPO-STV, but uses a
completely different method for determining the pairwise comparisons. If
slates are incorporated into CPO-STV it would seem equa
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Aaron Armitage
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm also stuck with plurality, and I agree entirely that plain-vanilla STV
> s a vast improvement
Right. Whatever PR-STV's flaws, they are minor compared
to plurality.
> If we wants slates that run as teams and are vot
I botched my attempt to chime in on STV elections by sending my reply to
Jonathan Lundell alone instead of the list at large. In spite of this he
was good enough to reply. below is my original comment and his reply, and
below that another comment from me.
--- On Mon, 8/18/08, Jonathan Lundell <[E
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Kathy Dopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RE: Civitas: Toward a Secure Voting System
> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/papers/civitas.html
>
> as mentioned by Andrew Myers of Cornell
>
FYI, One more informative response to the Civitas Voting System from
a voting sy
> Raph Frank > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:50 PM
> On 8/18/08, Jonathan Lundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:00 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
> > > I have to say I just do not understand the obsession with "lists".
> > An assumption, I think, that voters won't have the patie
Jonathan Lundell > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:09 PM
> > On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:00 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
> > I have to say I just do not understand the obsession with "lists".
> > I can understand why countries that have used party list PR for many
> > decades are (mostly) content not to
On 8/18/08, Jonathan Lundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:00 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
> > I have to say I just do not understand the obsession with "lists".
> An assumption, I think, that voters won't have the patience and attention
> span to evaluate a long list of candidate
On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:00 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
I have to say I just do not understand the obsession with "lists".
I can understand why countries that have used party list PR for
many decades are (mostly) content not to change, but those countries
have at least a century of a very differen
On 8/18/08, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That sounds like MMP. I think MMP can work if done right (with STV instead
> of FPTP as base, and reweighting to avoid lista civetta). Using party list
> here is probably better than the party-neutral version where you'd rank
> repres
Juho wrote:
This is a very interesting real life example on how such "horizontal"
preference orders may impact the elections and strategies in them.
Do you have a list of the strategies/tricks that are used?
One trick that appears, as has been mentioned in other posts here, is
vote managem
> Raph Frank > Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:55 PM
> > On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 7:34 PM, James Gilmour
> > I don't think registered "voter chosen lists" will ever get off the ground.
>
> The compromise was that each candidate would pick his own list.
No political party is ever going to tolerate
Yes, these are very practical political issues that practical reformers have to
take into account when proposing any change in the
voting system.
When opponents of reform here in Scotland complained about the "enormous" wards
that would be created by electing 3 or 4 councillors
together by STV-P
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:18 AM, James Gilmour wrote:
> > Here are some more data on exhausted ballot in real STV-PR elections:
> > TASMANIAN HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY POLLS 1913-2006: INCIDENCE OF EXHAUSTED VOTES
> > http://home.vicnet.net.au/~prsa/history/tas_exha.htm
> Raph Frank > Sent: Mon
13 matches
Mail list logo
