On 24.6.2011, at 3.47, Paul Kislanko wrote:
Marcus wrote:
Maskin's argumentation doesn't work because
of the following reason: Whether an election
method is good or bad depends on which criteria
it satisfies.
Now, if good and bad are defined by which criteria methods satisfy, it
The first time I heard the phrase True Majority Winner was in
the Scientific American article six or eight
years ago on Condorcet Voting. The point of the article was
that if you believe in majority rule, you
should prefer electing the CW over any other alternative. But at
the end of
I already emitted various criticisms of Eric Maskin...
http://www.rangevoting.org/MaskinArrow.html
http://www.rangevoting.org/Maskin.html
http://www.rangevoting.org/NewSciMcKenna.html
Maskin sometimes has favored Black's method (e.g. in a Scientific
American piece he wrote which actually
On Jun 24, 2011, at 4:40 PM, fsimm...@pcc.edu wrote:
The first time I heard the phrase True Majority Winner was in
the Scientific American article six or eight
years ago on Condorcet Voting. The point of the article was
that if you believe in majority rule, you
should prefer electing the CW
From: Jameson Quinn
To: robert bristow-johnson
Cc: Markus Schulze ,
election-meth...@electorama.com
Subject: Re: [EM] Eric Maskin promotes the Black method
and we've all been groping for a name for this primary voting
criteria that
is not this non-American, Frenchie, probably
Marcus wrote:
Maskin's argumentation doesn't work because
of the following reason: Whether an election
method is good or bad depends on which criteria
it satisfies.
Now, if good and bad are defined by which criteria methods satisfy, it
seems to me that having introduced judgement we need
Paul Kislanko wrote:
Marcus wrote:
Maskin's argumentation doesn't work because
of the following reason: Whether an election
method is good or bad depends on which criteria
it satisfies.
Now, if good and bad are defined by which criteria methods satisfy, it
seems to me that having
and we've all been groping for a name for this primary voting criteria that
is not this non-American, Frenchie, probably sorta pinko-socialist secular
humanist intellectual (did i mention *not* American?) whose heresy is
leading us away from the One True Faith of the Single Affirmative Vote.
Hallo,
Eric Maskin, a Nobel laureate, is currently very
active in promoting the Black method. The Black
method says: If there is a Condorcet winner, then
the Condorcet winner should win; if there is no
Condorcet winner, then the Borda winner should win.
See e.g.:
1 Sep 2009:
Markus Schulze wrote:
Hallo,
Eric Maskin, a Nobel laureate, is currently very
active in promoting the Black method. The Black
method says: If there is a Condorcet winner, then
the Condorcet winner should win; if there is no
Condorcet winner, then the Borda winner should win.
(...)
Maskin's
Dear all,
Why not write an open letter to him (i.e. publish the letter on this
list) and invite him to further discuss on this list?
I found Maskin's email: mas...@ias.edu in his CV, which is online.
If hybrid methods is the way to go, then the forthcoming paper in
Voting matters which Kristofer
On Jun 21, 2011, at 7:56 AM, Markus Schulze wrote:
Hallo,
Eric Maskin, a Nobel laureate, is currently very
active in promoting the Black method.
i have to confess, even though i had heard of ranked-choice voting
before and had myself thought that what would later to be learned is
called
12 matches
Mail list logo
