On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 6:42 PM, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
About six years ago Toby Nixon asked the members of this EM list for a
advice on what election method
to try propose in the Washington State Legislature. He finally settled
on CSSD beatpath. As near
fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
About six years ago Toby Nixon asked the members of this EM list for a advice on what election method
to try propose in the Washington State Legislature. He finally settled on CSSD beatpath. As near as I
know nothing came of it. What would we propose if we had
matt welland wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 22:42 +, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
On the other hand Approval requires reliable polling information for
informed strategy. This fact makes Approval vulnerable to
manipulation by disinformation.
Is this a generally accepted truth? I don't think I
For a legislature one could use also multi-winner and proportional methods, but
I think the question was what single-winner method to recommend. (I'd probably
recommend proportional methods for most multi-winner elections, unless the
community explicitly wants to have a two-party system.)
On May 25, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Andrew Myers wrote:
On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 6:42 PM, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
About six years ago Toby Nixon asked the members of this EM list
for a
advice on what election method
to try propose in the Washington State
matt welland wrote ...
The only strategy in
approval is to hold your nose and check off the front runner you
despise because you don't want the other front runner you despise
more to win.
The main problem is determining (through the disinformation noise) who the
front runners really are.
- Original Message -
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Date: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 11:31 pm
Subject: Re: [EM] remember Toby Nixon?
To: fsimm...@pcc.edu
Cc: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
About six years ago Toby Nixon asked the members of this EM
list for
On May 25, 2011, at 9:17 PM, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Being who I am, I would either pick Ranked Pairs or CSSD
(Beatpath,
Schulze): the former if it's more important that it can be
explained
easily, the latter if precedence is more
On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 01:07 +, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
matt welland wrote ...
The only strategy in
approval is to hold your nose and check off the front runner you
despise because you don't want the other front runner you despise
more to win.
The main problem is determining
