[EM] the name of the rose

Dear folks, I don't expect anyone to care about this, but I just thought that I would ask. Feel free to respond off-list if you prefer. I'm considering a change in the name of the voting system I've invented, from "weighted pairwise" to "cardinal pairwise". The reason I'm consideri

Re: [EM] Advocacy of Kemeny's method

Steven Barney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Does this group, or anyone here, advocate Kemeny's method? Haha, I like the idea of this group taking a unified stand on anything at all... I've never heard of it happening. Maybe we all agree that there exists some voting method that is superior

Re: [EM] Advocacy of Kemeny's method

Mike R wrote: > Steven B wrote: >> Does this group, or anyone here, >> advocate Kemeny's method? > > I personally like it the best of all the methods > I've seen, except for the "NP-hard" part. I'll > advocate it without reservation when quantum > computers become available. :) The obvious que

Re: [EM] Advocacy of Kemeny's method

I personally like it the best of all the methods I've seen, except for the "NP-hard" part. I'll advocate it without reservation when quantum computers become available. :) Mike Rouse Steven Barney wrote: Does this group, or anyone here, advocate Kemeny's method? Steve Barney Oshkosh, WI Ele

[EM] Advocacy of Kemeny's method

Does this group, or anyone here, advocate Kemeny's method? Steve Barney Oshkosh, WI Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Re: [EM] "Third Parties Presidential Debate"... and debates in general

Hi all, On Sep 13, 2004, at 10:26 PM, James Green-Armytage wrote: So I guess what I want to add as a comment is that it is really important for debates to feature direct exchanges between the candidates. They need to be able to ask each other questions. Also, I would prefer it if they were each ab