>could you explain the details of how ER-IRV (whole and fractional) are
>tabulated?
>I searched the list, and found a few posts about ER-IRV from this
>spring/summer (including your humorous June 7 post), but none of them
>describe the method in detail.
I don't know how detailed I can ge
At 11:05 AM -0700 10/15/04, Brian Olson wrote:
The variations I implemented were obviously rational and fair to
me. I may need some convincing of other variations. I think I'm
allergic to the use of randomness in election methods, so I don't
plan on implementing such an option.
Well, the three meth
On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:54:36 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Bart Ingles wrote:
I started out on this list in 1998 as an IRV supporter, but now see it
as a step in the wrong direction. Back then I believed IRV had
properties I considered important (e.g. resistance to low-
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:20:23 -0500 Paul Kislanko wrote:
I have to interject again.
"Likewise, IRV can suffer spoilers, a problem Condorcet avoids by reading
all the ranking in each ballot."
Condorcet does not reference ballots, Condorcet depends upon the pairwise
matrix which cannot be mapped back
On Oct 15, 2004, at 7:24 AM, Eric Gorr wrote:
At 11:15 PM -0700 10/14/04, James Cooper wrote:
could you explain the details of how ER-IRV (whole and fractional) are
tabulated?
I have Equal Ranking IRV Whole & Fractional implemented within my
voting calculator.
You should be able to discern how th
On 15 Oct 2004 at 08:56 PDT, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
>
> Ted--
>
> Thanks for your interesting posting about the possiblity of achieving what
> AERLO achieves, but with just one count.
>
> I've copied that posting, to check it out.
>
> But let me briefly comment now: It isn't as if AERLO requires t
Washington State legal interpretations inserted below -- note that IANAL.
On 14 Oct 2004 at 20:43 PDT, Brian Olson wrote:
>
> On Oct 12, 2004, at 8:34 PM, James Cooper wrote:
>
>> I'm a activist in Washington state who is interested in eliminating
>> the plurality system here. We have a state-wid
Hi,
Jobst wrote:
> Below is an attempt to formulate a compromise proposal
> which combines what I think are the most useful
> ingredients to a good Condorcet method.
-snip-
> The GOALS are:
-snip-
> 2. DEFEATS
> Determine all defeats as usual.
> Strength of defeat X>Y
> = number of v
Ted--
Thanks for your interesting posting about the possiblity of achieving what
AERLO achieves, but with just one count.
I've copied that posting, to check it out.
But let me briefly comment now: It isn't as if AERLO requires two
ballotings--it's just two counts, and that won't take a significa
Could I get help with the proper names for various Condorcet completion methods?
Assume that the Smith set has more than one candidate. I am looking for the
names of the following completion methods:
Baldwin (Borda-Elim) -- Eliminate candidate with lowest Borda score and repeat
??? -- Baldwin, b
At 11:15 PM -0700 10/14/04, James Cooper wrote:
could you explain the details of how ER-IRV (whole and fractional) are
tabulated?
I have Equal Ranking IRV Whole & Fractional implemented within my
voting calculator.
You should be able to discern how things get tabulated easily enough
by selected
11 matches
Mail list logo