Hi Forest,
--- En date de : Lun 18.7.11, fsimm...@pcc.edu a écrit :
> > The "pecking order" is the Range order. Assume no
> ties.
>
> I suppose that you could use the range order for the
> pecking order, but as you mention below that could
> lead to some strategic distortions.
>
> The pecking
> From: Kevin Venzke
> Hi Forest,
>
> So here's my summary using a 4-slot ballot and 3 candidates
> let's say.
>
> The "pecking order" is the Range order. Assume no ties.
I suppose that you could use the range order for the pecking order, but as you
mention below that could
lead to some stra
- Original Message -
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Date: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:12 pm
Subject: Re: [EM] Centrist vs. non-Centrists (was A distance based method)
To: fsimm...@pcc.edu
Cc: election-methods@lists.electorama.com
> fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
> >
> > - Original Message -
Hi Andrew,
--- En date de : Lun 18.7.11, Andrew Myers a écrit :
> Python is a bit nicer than Perl, but
> if you implement your voting method
> in Perl, you can plug it into CIVS. Then people can and
> will start using
> it for real polls.
>
> For the software see:
> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/
Python is a bit nicer than Perl, but if you implement your voting method
in Perl, you can plug it into CIVS. Then people can and will start using
it for real polls.
For the software see:
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/w8/~andru/civs/changelog.html
Cheers,
-- Andrew
On 7/22/64 2:59 PM, Juho Laat
Hi Forest,
So here's my summary using a 4-slot ballot and 3 candidates let's say.
The "pecking order" is the Range order. Assume no ties.
The "proximity" between two candidates is the smaller of 6 (3*2), and
the product of the two candidates' ratings, summed from each ballot.
When finding the
fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Date: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 2:12 pm
Subject: Re: [EM] Centrist vs. non-Centrists (was A distance based method)
To: fsimm...@pcc.edu
Cc: Jameson Quinn , election-methods@lists.electorama.com
I think you said
-
> HBH stands for Hog Belly Honey, the name of an inerrant
> "nullifier" invented by a couple of R.A. Lafferty
> characters. The HBH is the only known nullifier that can "posit
> moral and ethical judgments, set up and
> enforce categories, discern and make full philosophical
> pronouncements," in
There sure are many programmers on this list as you can guess also from the
latest mails. Many of them have lots of voting related software. I don't know
what languages people use, but Python certainly is a good general purpose tool.
So maybe there is some interest in open libraries in this area
- Original Message -
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Date: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 2:12 pm
Subject: Re: [EM] Centrist vs. non-Centrists (was A distance based method)
To: fsimm...@pcc.edu
Cc: Jameson Quinn , election-methods@lists.electorama.com
> fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
>
> > Of course i
Here's something close to what I had in mind originally:
Let p be the probability distribution for a monotone, clone free, lottery like
random favorite.
Define the distance between rating ballots b1 and b2 as
d(b1, b2) = [sum (over the alternatives X) of the product
p(X)*|b1(X)-b2(X)|^n]^(1/n)
HBH stands for Hog Belly Honey, the name of an inerrant "nullifier" invented by
a couple of R.A. Lafferty
characters. The HBH is the only known nullifier that can "posit moral and
ethical judgments, set up and
enforce categories, discern and make full philosophical pronouncements," in
other w
Hi Forest,
--- En date de : Sam 16.7.11, fsimm...@pcc.edu a écrit :
> Kevin,
>
> Do we agree that working from closest pairs outward solves
> the Plurality problem (at the expense of
> compromise and less monotonicity)?
Not sure. My sim often doesn't find any Plurality failures even when
they
13 matches
Mail list logo
