On Jan 4, 2005, at 11:09 PM, James Green-Armytage wrote:
Range voting is neither a majority rule method, a supermajority rule
method, nor a proportional representation method. Therefore, its
applications are very limited.
Let's say that our voting scenario is a large group of people choosing
an
Dear Forest!
Big Sorry for not having read carefully enough. I missed the point about
public elections not being supposed to show much symmetry. That is a
very good point I guess which we could even strengthen to this claim:
In almost all public elections, there will either be a CW or a
I got an interesting email from Warren D. Smith a couple of days ago
concerning range voting, and I was wondering if anyone had considered it
as a Condorcet completion method, kind of like how Borda is used in
Black's method. I did a Google search for condorcet range, (range
voting condorcet
Dear Craig,
you wrote (7 Jan 2005):
Well, I didn't underestimate your intelligence when I
expected that you would be perfectly unable to solve
the easy problem of deriving a solution to the 2 candidate
1 winner election problem.
Well, this depends on what you mean with solving
2-candidate
I'd like to thank Chris Benham for providing me the links to James
Green-Armytage's site, which answered a lot of my questions.
I might as well ask another question, since this one went so well: Has
anyone tried replacing Borda with Range voting in methods like Borda
elimination or Nanson to
Mike,
--- Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I might as well ask another question, since this one went so well: Has
anyone tried replacing Borda with Range voting in methods like Borda
elimination or Nanson to see what the properties and paradoxes were?
In what I call Approval-Elimination
Some of the criticisms expressed about Approval Voting (AV) don't strike me
as very reasonable. One person objected to AV in a private message because he
believes it suffers from the Prisoner's Dilemma problem. But the leading
academic advocate fo AV and one of its co-inventors, Steven Brams,
Hi all,
Our Man Arnold in his State of California address pushed for a whole
bunch of reforms, including putting redistricting in the hands of a
non-partisan judges panel.
As you can imagine there's a huge hue and cry. Mostly from partisans
who fear accountability, but some from thoughtful
There's no way for any voter, no matter how strategically
sophisticated, to know what the best way to vote is. Their hedge vote
could
prevent their first choice from winning (a bad outcome) but it could also
prevent their last choice from winning (a good outcome).
Yes, that's just what I
On 7 Jan 2005 at 14:43 PST, Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
Any other thoughts? I can't help but think that some sort of
'four-color' theorem might be relevant, but I'm darned if I know how...
The Iowa plan has worked well for 20-odd years:
Dr.Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
This brings us back to the question of automated redistricting. We've
often discussed how the 'fairest' algorithm would use a measure such
as minimizing lanes of traffic cut by the circumference by
combining census tracts while ensuring equal-population districts.
On Jan 7, 2005, at 3:01 PM, Ted Stern wrote:
The Iowa plan has worked well for 20-odd years:
http://www.centrists.org/pages/2004/07/7_buck_trust.html
There is a similar method in place in Washington State.
Hey, *I* like it. But reading that article, it seems to require a
certain level of
Wow, convergent evolution. Just a couple days ago I turned my attention to
redistricting.
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Dr.Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
This brings us back to the question of automated redistricting. We've often
discussed how the 'fairest' algorithm would use a measure such as
minimizing lanes
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 15:07:16 -0800
From: Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Deterministic Districting
Mike wrote ...
Well, it's not really deterministic (in the sense that the results are
repeatable), but one could could put the districting maps on the ballot
along with the candidate.
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Forest Simmons wrote:
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 15:07:16 -0800
From: Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Deterministic Districting
Mike wrote ...
Well, it's not really deterministic (in the sense that the results are
repeatable), but one could could put the districting maps
15 matches
Mail list logo
