.. though I still believe the Correlated Instant Borda Runoff (CIBR)
approach is a respectable solution to this problem.
sigh... someday maybe I'll develop the skills necessary to be able to flesh
out that assertion..
http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Correlated_Instant_Borda_Runoff
There's a lot I could cover here, but let's just touch on the very basics:
First, I'm happy to report that I've discovered that Nabble is able to
act both as a gateway and an archive for Mailman (which is the
software that this listserv runs). This effectively means that we
don't have to come to
--- Brandon J. Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit:
This kind of back-and-forth has convinced me that your list has no value
whatsoever. I'm unsubscribing. I suggest you go to a moderated format
and put a muzzle on people who are precipitating this kind of nonsense.
The credibility
On 1/19/07, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:33 PM 1/19/2007, Ken Kuhlman wrote:
Free speech may be messy, but it's better than selling our souls
bowing before a moderator czar.
That's not the only possible solution. Indeed, the solution has been
known as in widespread use
Sorry Mike, I should have said I don't see the purpose of the
criterion, rather than the value of.. The question was a matter of
clarity, not of value. Rob Lanphier kindly clarified the criterion
in another posting (thanks Rob!), so my response here will be limited.
I see now that the SFC
both the original definition and this revised one seem to reduce to
the Smith criterion.
-Ken Kuhlman
On 10/5/05, MIKE OSSIPOFF [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For SFC-complying methods, if falsification doesn't occur on a
results-changing scale:
Any sincere-voting majority is guaranteed that no one
Forest.. good stuff! Thanks for the post. A few questions:
On 8/30/05, Simmons, Forest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The main serious Condorcet proposals over the past ten years have been
Beatpath, Ranked Pairs, and MinMax which I have listed in increasing order
of simplicity and decreasing order
In the statement that Rob LeGrand posted from the CAV/AAV board, I
find the following statement from the footnote particularly
interesting:
Although Range Voting provides a generalization of Approval Voting,
it is not obvious how many levels of approval voters should be
allowed to indicate:
On 6/9/05, Chris Benham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ken,Does CIBR(like plain Borda)meet Participation? (a tall order).If not, does it meet Mono-raise (i.e. is it monotonic)?
These are interesting questions, and I'll try to take a look at them in
the future. I'm going to have to give you a rain check
On 5/27/05, Araucaria Araucana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen this Borda-advocate logic before.
Not surprising. As I stated, it's a summary of an explanation made by Saari.
Eliminating 'symmetric' votes is just eliminating votes.
No vote has been eliminated.. some have cancelled. To again
First, a reposting for Jobst:
CIBR stands for Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, and is a tweak of Baldwin to
solve the clone problem.
Individual ballots are scored according to the Borda count, and then
all possible candidate pairs are ranked according to correlation.
The Borda loser of
I wrote:
Clone-ness thus can't be a binary factor that is either on or off, but a continuous function. I fear this isn't blunt enough, so let me restate:
The fundamental problem with a plain Borda count isn't clones per se, it's that it doesn't directly take into consideration how candidates
I've recently become interested in election methods, and have noticed
that while the Borda count has been shown to have many desirable
properties, it is customarily dismissed because of its susceptibility
to clones. The method proposed below, which I call
Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, is
Eric Gorr wrote: Ken Kuhlman wrote: The method proposed below, which I call Correlated Instant Borda Runoff, is basically a tweak of Baldwin to solve the clone problem.
There seems to be a problem with a case where a high-correlation would exist, but there are not actual clones...i.e. your
14 matches
Mail list logo
