>I think that Andy's question about who the PR winners should be in the three
>winner (approval) scenario
20 AC
20 AD
20 AE
20 BC
20 BD
20 BE
needs more consideration.
As was pointed out {C, D, E} seems the best, even though PAV would say
the slates
{A,B,C}, {A,B,D}, and {A,B,E} are tied for be
Perhaps I should start by asking you to explain amalgamation. I have an idea
of what you mean, but you didn't explain it in the initial post of this
thread, and I don't want to write a detailed analysis based on a
possibly-wrong supposition.
JQ
2011/7/31
> Jameson,
>
> for my benefit could you
Jameson,
for my benefit could you elaborate on what you mean by hijacking strategy,
especially in the context of
amalgamation of factions.
Is ordinary Range susceptible to hijacking? If not, then neither is
amalgamation of factions per se, since
Range scores are identical with or without ama
Juho Laatu wrote:
Andy Jennings' question is a good question.
The original votes were
20 AC
20 AD
20 AE
20 BC
20 BD
20 BE
Let's decrease the support of A and B a bit (20 approvals reduced
from both of them).
20 C
20 AD
20 AE
20 C
20 BD
20 BE
Would {A,B,C} be a good choice now? It is not g
Andy Jennings' question is a good question.
The original votes were
20 AC
20 AD
20 AE
20 BC
20 BD
20 BE
Let's decrease the support of A and B a bit (20 approvals reduced from both of
them).
20 C
20 AD
20 AE
20 C
20 BD
20 BE
Would {A,B,C} be a good choice now? It is not good if reduction of ap
