On Mar 21, 2010, at 1:30 AM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
On Mar 20, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Markus Schulze wrote:
Here are the proposed statutory rules:
http://m-schulze.webhop.net/propstat.pdf
__
Suppose d[V,W] is the number of valid ballots on which candidate V
is strictly
sorry if this is too long
On Mar 21, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Markus Schulze wrote:
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote (21 March 2010):
Schulze's advantage is that it's actually being
used and that it provides good results (by the
Minmax standard). Ranked Pairs's (or MAM's,
rather) is that it's easy
Stephen Turner wrote:
Hello. It's been quite a while since
I posted here. I have a question: does
anyone have any good pointers
to material on metrics on elections?
A "metric" is as usual, and an
"election" would be simply an
election profile, that is you have
some set S of permitted ballot ty
Hello. It's been quite a while since
I posted here. I have a question: does
anyone have any good pointers
to material on metrics on elections?
A "metric" is as usual, and an
"election" would be simply an
election profile, that is you have
some set S of permitted ballot types,
and so man
Hallo,
Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote (21 March 2010):
> Schulze's advantage is that it's actually being
> used and that it provides good results (by the
> Minmax standard). Ranked Pairs's (or MAM's,
> rather) is that it's easy to explain.
>
> The question is: which of these qualities are
> more im
Markus Schulze wrote:
Hallo,
of course, I am leaning towards the Schulze method.
This method is by far the most wide-spread Condorcet
method. It is used by about 50 organizations with
about 100,000 eligible members in total. It has also
become very popular among scientists:
http://en.wikipedia.
