In the recent message quted below there are two questions.
1. What should we call the Approval method that allows an extra mark to
identfy the favorite candidate, thus satisfying the Approval voter's urge to
give more moal support to Favorite than to Compromise?
I suggest "Approval Plus" or
"A>B>>others, which is not
quite the same as A>B>others."
No. A+=B is still A>B. The >> thing is irrelevant.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ] On Behalf Of Gervase Lam
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 5:16 PM
> To: election-methods-elector
> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 18:45:11 -0500
> From: "Paul Kislanko"
> Subject: [EM] RE: Bucklin
> I still don't see why A+=B>others is any different from A>B>others.
OK. Another way to describe A+=B>others is A>B>>others, which is not
quite the same as A>B>others.
For a moment, having the '+' the
Title: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better Proposal
As a novice in the EM field but as a literate lay-person I
think I can explain the logical argument below (see
below).
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Simmons, Forest Sent: Tuesd
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun 9/25/2005 12:00 PM
To: election-methods-electorama.com@electorama.com
Subject: Election-methods Digest, Vol 15, Issue 53
I had written ..
> Note that in ordinary Bucklin the ordinal informat
Perhaps there is a name for what I'm going to describe here, and
someone will kindly inform me.
I have suggested in the past that Approval elections include an extra
position for each candidate to mark "Preferred," even if this mark is
not used to determine the winner, because it would answer
Title: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better Proposal
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005, Jeff Fisher
wrote:>> Cycles (Condorcet paradoxes) still exist in DMC whether
it recognizes> them or not. To avoid discussing them would be possible
but dishonest.>> DMC's tendency to hide cycles rather
