On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:27:07 -0600 Kathy Dopp wrote:
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:02:44 -0400
From: Dave Ketchum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines
Federal certification? The many horror stories tell us either:
Equipment is failing that has ne
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:02:44 -0400
> From: Dave Ketchum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [EM] Why We Shouldn't Count Votes with Machines
> Federal certification? The many horror stories tell us either:
> Equipment is failing that has never been "certified" or
> The certifiers are si
On Aug 23, 2008, at 3:34 PM, James Gilmour wrote:
And why should there be guaranteed proportionality for women? The
logical corollary is guaranteed proportionality for men. Just
for the record, I am opposed to both and would be very happy if 60%
or more of the MSPs in the Scottish Parliamen
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 9:55 PM, Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, in general members of some group in the parliament are expected to vote
> the same way most of the time. Different parties have somewhat different
> attitude. In some questions the groups explicitly give free hands to their
> m
Juho > Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 9:56 PM
> Trying to guarantee proportionality for women at national level may
> be tricky if there is no "woman party" that the candidates and voters
> could name (well, the sex of a candidate is typically known, but that
> is a special case).
I think
The "cooling off" type of rules is what I'd expect to see in place to
eliminate too radical and surprising changes.
Not all changes in opinions are malicious (coups or something like
that). It is also quite possible and even typical that some
representative changes his opinion from A to B s
At least traditions, the need to have computers to count the votes,
and maybe also the problem of classifying representatives to more and
less important ones are some reasons why this approach is not widely
used.
Allowing representatives to have different voting power can increase
the acc
On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:47 , Raph Frank wrote:
On 8/22/08, Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 22, 2008, at 2:18 , Raph Frank wrote:
Thus, I don't see them as massively different ... the trees just
add more
structure and reduce the freedom.
The intention was not to reduce freedom. If a v
On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:36 , Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Juho wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 12:10 , Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
The extreme would be a voting system where people just say how
much they agree with an opinion, for all relevant opinions, and
then the system picks the maximally
On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:12 , Raph Frank wrote:
On 8/22/08, Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In Finland where the number of candidates is relatively high some
less
obvious candidates may have some trouble getting in to the lists
but on the
other hand some well known figures (that have become p
On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:53 , Raph Frank wrote:
On 8/22/08, Juho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The advertisements of the candidates have the number clearly
visible in them, and there are lists of all candidates (including
their
party affiliation and number) available at the voting site and
elsew
Raph Frank wrote:
> On 8/22/08, Michael Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ... But cycles can occur only at the bottom of each casacade,
> > where they result in pools. Pools are equivalent to roots, so
> > d'Hondt (etc.) should still work.
>
> Maybe a rule like
>
> 1) Find the candidate with
> Is it always the case that when there is a tie, each member
> of the tie defeats everyone else except one?
Consider the ranked votes
A>B>C>D>E
B>C>D>E>A
C>D>E>A>B
D>E>A>B>C
E>A>B>C>D
Each candidate has two pairwise victories and two pairwise defeats.
--
Rob LeGrand, psephologist
[EMAIL PROTEC
I was just wondering something about condorcet circular ties.
Is it always the case that when there is a tie, each member of the tie
defeats everyone else except one?
Thus, if a candidate is defeated by 2 other candidates, he can be
immediately discarded as a possible winner. If it is true, is t
14 matches
Mail list logo
