Paul Kislanko kislanko-at-airmail.net |EMlist| wrote:
At the risk of showing my ignorance again,
Choice of Approval strategies depends largely on what you prefer to
estimate.
Somehow I think there should be a way to label posts that are about
"strategies that voters should employ for a given elec
At the risk of showing my ignorance again,
>
> Choice of Approval strategies depends largely on what you prefer to
> estimate.
Somehow I think there should be a way to label posts that are about
"strategies that voters should employ for a given election method" as
opposed to "this election metho
Choice of Approval strategies depends largely on what you prefer to
estimate.
I suggested a strategy that I called Expected Differences, which, for
deciding whether to vote for candidate X, requires judging the probability
that X will be in a tie or near-tie with someone better, or someone wor
Dear Nathan,
I have attached a copy of my 8 June 1998 mail to Mike
Ossipoff where I criticize Ossipoff's subcycle rule #2.
Markus Schulze
> Mon Jun 08 16:40:30 1998
> To: Mike Ossipoff
> From: Markus Schulze
> Subject: Re: better letter
>
> Dear Mike,
>
> you wrote (8 Jun 1998):
> > For the init
James--
Yes, it seems to me that the candidate withdrawal option would help any
voting system. It would avoid the worst of Plurality & IRV, and it would
tend to complete the perfection of Condorcet(wv).
When the subject was being discussed on EM a few years ago, I was saying
that the candidate
Jim Ronback> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 5:44 AM
>
> I am very uncomfortable with complexity of the process used for
> transferring surplus marks of the candidates in the STV counting
> process. That counting process is very difficult for most voters to
> follow.
It is probably the case
Dear Nathan,
you wrote (11 Feb 2005):
> Was the example for how this violated Pareto posted
> to the list?
No. I posted this example in a private mail to Mike
Ossipoff ca. on 12 June 1998. Unfortunately, I don't
have a copy of this mail.
Markus Schulze
Election-methods mailing list - see ht
Hi folks,
I've been trying to imagine how the candidate withdrawal option (CWO)
might play out, if added to something like beatpath or ranked pairs in a
large-scale public election. (Briefly, CWO is that any non-winning
candidate can order a post-election re-tally in which they are delete
