[EM] Part 2, Bias-Free reply

that for Warren. Only a pretentious pompous ass would believe that I spoke of a uniform frequency distribution over an infinite range of positive and negative state populations. Plainly I was refering to the distribution over the range in which apportionment actually takes place. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Bias-Free

of using a perhaps unfamiliar substitute for the term divisor method? Sure. When you say that it is a divisor method, and you say how to find the rounding point between consecutive integers a and b, then you have fully defined the method. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Bias-Free, contd.

. Warren hasn't posted a brief and concise statement of the goal of his derivation of his method, and a brief and concise outline of the derivation. Just pages of ramble. If he can't clearly and concisely say what he's doing, he should consider that maybe he doesn't know. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Bias-Free, contd.

test of BF that I referred to was done by Dan Bishop, for 2000 1990. Mike Ossipoff _ Dave vs. Carl: The Insignificant Championship Series.  Who will win? http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp007001msn/direct/01/?href=http

[EM] Credentials?

using math that wouldn't be a problem for a genuine math professor. This professor sounds more like a pretentious crank. If Warren is a professor, then he's an incompetent one. Mike Ossipoff _ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden

Re: [EM] Aha, now I understand Ossipoff...

. In this instance, confusion about the range in which a divisor method's rounding rule could need a disstribution assumption. BF only needs its assumption within a cycle, not over the infinite number-line. Confusion and error are evidently Warren's consistent trademark. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Part 2, Aha, now l understand Ossipoff...

this equation in an earlier email to Ossipoff some days ago. I reply: Warren sent me pages and pages of gibberish. I confess that I didn't read it. His writing doesn't inspire much confidence. Mike Ossipoff _ Your Hotmail address

[EM] Correction: AR doesn't need improvement. AR is the best method.

awarded to the cycle's states is as close as possible to the total number of current quota possessed by the cycle's states. Mike Ossipoff _ Dave vs. Carl: The Insignificant Championship Series.  Who will win? http://clk.atdmt.com

[EM] Meet Warren Smith

, Bias-Free is between Hill and Webster. In the long run it will be less biased than eilther. Mike Ossipoff _ Your Hotmail address already works to sign into Windows Live Messenger! Get it now http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go

[EM] Part 2, Meet Warren Smith

From: MIKE OSSIPOFF [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Warren EM 2 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:57:31 + Warren said: well, you never showed us your math, but it is obvious to me that you messed up for several reasons I reply: I repeately gave instructions for the derivation

[EM] Part 3, Meet Warren Smith

to not making many angrily-worded unsuported claims. Mike Ossipoff _ Fixing up the home? Live Search can help http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=improvelocale=en-USsource=hmemailtaglinenov06FORM=WLMTAG

[EM] Typo

, and the resulting equation solved for R, then R is 1/e. More specifically, the improper integral is the one between a and R, when a = 0. Mike Ossipoff _ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http

[EM] Cycle-Webster definition written more completely

needing re-calculation are those of cycles that have received a seat since their score was last calculated). (With the 1-seat-minimum requirement, each cycle initially has a number of seats equal to its number of states that it contains. Instruction #2 is unchanged. Mike

[EM] I propose Bias-Free, Cycle-Webster, and Adjusted-Rounding

seats. The iterative systematic procedures so convenient in Jefferson, Webster, Hill, Bias-Free, Cycle-Webster, etc., won't work in AR. Trial and error is needed to find the quota that gives 435 seats. \ Mike Ossipoff _ Get FREE Web

[EM] Typo--undefined term

In the message that I just sent to EM, I referred to Ds/q. By that I mean a state's seats minus what one seat per quota would give to it, that signed difference divided by the state's quotas. Mike Ossipoff _ Your Hotmail address

[EM] Clariflying Adjusted Rounding definition

a Cycle-Hamilton. It too would be completely unbiased, but wouldn't have the immediate optimality of Cycle-Webster. Mike Ossipoff _ Find sales, coupons, and free shipping, all in one place!  MSN Shopping Sales Deals http

[EM] Thanks for postsing the 1790 results

are minimized by Webster. But I claim that what really matters is Hill's systematic giving of more s/q to smaller states. Systematically favoring large or small states is inexcusable for an apportionment method. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Ratio vs difference

how many more seats represent me, compared to how many seats represent you (of course those numbers are much less than 1). So s/q difference, rather than its ratio, is what matters. Mike Ossipoff _ Visit MSN Holiday Challenge

[EM] Would would you say about a method that gives a seat to a 1-person state?

unbiased. Then, Bias-Free and Hamilton should be offered to Congress, and it would be up to them whether they want the ideal (Bias-Free), or something less elaborate, and more traditional and precedented (Hamilton). Mike Ossipoff _ Get

[EM] Same goal, opposite results. Examine the differences.

to choose the method that gets rid of s/q expectation disparity as judged at a time _before_ the census and allocation. Mike Ossipoff _ Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered by Pandora http

[EM] A numerical example with Bias-Free and Hill

. Maybe someone would like to determine the probability of that difference of the means under the null assumption of no bias. Maybe someone would like to apply other tests for bias. Mike Ossipoff _ All-in-one security and maintenance

[EM] Brian--spatial simulations

on the list before I quit last time, a few years ago? Mike Ossipoff _ Share your latest news with your friends with the Windows Live Spaces friends module. http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp007001msn/direct/01/?href=http

[EM] Once and for all--Bias vs transfer properties

is difficult to define. Bias is a systematic disparity in seats-per-quota expectation for states of different population. Bias-Free has no bias. Mike Ossipoff _ View Athlete’s Collections with Live Search http://sportmaps.live.com

[EM] Clarification of Bias-Free formula

/a^a)(1/e) Mike Ossipoff _ MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by style, age, and price. Try it! http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8000,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200601tcode=wlmtagline election

[EM] Webster has a little bias. The Unbiased Rounding method.

descriptively) Unbiased Roundoff. Largest-Remander/Hamilton is the only distribution-independent unbiased method. Mike Ossipoff _ WIN up to $10,000 in cash or prizes – enter the Microsoft Office Live Sweepstakes http://clk.atdmt.com

[EM] Webster bias?

equally well be anywhere between two and three. So I also retract what I said about LR's unbias being less distribution-dependant than that of Webster. Mike Ossipoff _ Get the latest Windows Live Messenger 8.1 Beta version. Join now

[EM] Webster vs Bias-Free

a seat for no good reason. For that reason we want BF or Webster. BF would be better, but Webster is simpler, more naturally obvious, and has precedent. Mike Ossipoff _ Share your latest news with your friends with the Windows Live

[EM] Juho--Why Largest-Remainder/Hamilton is unbiased

table. But never bet what you can't afford to lose. So, Juho, say your favorite party is proportionally qualified for one seat. LR might give it one, two, or zero seats. Do you really want to play double-or-nothing with your representation? Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Simple dfn of proportionality bias leaves no doubt: Webster wins

-looking proofs. The question is: How did Huntington Hill make their big error? Maybe they were looking for something complicated and missed the obvious. Maybe they were partial toward something original that they could call their own. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Typo

I accidentally said that Hill has unbias. I meant to say that it has bias. Mike Ossipoff p.s. Right now is close to the anniversary of the date when Webster was replaced by Hill, for apportioning the House. _ Stay up-to-date

[EM] FW: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 65.54.229.220 by by110fd.bay110.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 09 Dec 2006 03:44:18 GMT X-Originating-IP: [12.184.65.24] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: MIKE OSSIPOFF [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED

[EM] FW: Re: Transfers of seats between states

proportions differ. If the transfer of a seat between two states makes their v/s differ by a smaller factor than it did before, then something is wrong with the initial allocation. Mike Ossipoff _ Stay up-to-date with your friends

[EM] Hamilton vs Webster (Sainte-Lague)

You wrote: I understand that LR/Hamilton may lead to the Alabama paradox and people may dislike LR/Hamilton because of this. But I think LR/ Hamilton is quite proportional and unbiased. I reply: Hamilton is unbiased, as is Webster. But though Hamilton doesn't systematically deviate from

[EM] Sainte-Lague addenda

demonstration seems valid, if not well-worded. Mike Ossipoff _ Talk now to your Hotmail contacts with Windows Live Messenger. http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme002001msn/direct/01/?href=http://get.live.com/messenger/overview

[EM] Election-Day musings. Sainte-Lague is the best PR.

current seats + .5 numbers, then we get a sequence of odd numbers. That's where the well-known SL odd numbers formula comes from. It's often mistakenly said that SL favors small parties. Not so. SL is the unbiased monotonic allocation method. I'll continue this in a subsequent posting. Mike

[EM] Sainte-Lague, part 3

and optimally proportional, offers an opening into the subject of electoral reform, which can then lead to more significant reforms, starting with a better single-winner method. Mike Ossipoff _ Visit MSN Holiday Challenge for your chance

[EM] Sainte-Lage, continued

give the right number of seats, goes to another procedrue, abandoning the use of a quota. SL merely picks a quote that does exactly what the Hare quota was suspposed to do. to be continued... Mike Ossipoff _ View Athlete’s

[EM] Invitation for anyone to copy, web-post, or distribute my articles /or postings

, with no voting system comment in the posting. That was what I wanted to say. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01

[EM] One more obvious thing about Approval

? Of course you do that because you already lack power, with a favorite who isn't very winnable. This retirement wasn't very neat, since I had a few more things I wanted to say. But this covers it. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just

[EM] Public elections are the ones that matter.

remote forest is affected by public policy, and therefore by voting systems. Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ election

[EM] Dave: Approval vs rank methods

all that matters? Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em

[EM] Beatpath and SSD aren't manipulable. Manipulable is barking up the wrong tree.

they are forced to vote their incompetence full-strength, all or nothing. Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ election-methods

[EM] RLPO2PA

RLPO2PA has a brief definition, but, for the public, it won't be perceived as a simple definition. They won't like recursion. Does RLPO2PA have good properties? Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN

[EM] Dave: More levels of expressable preference

in a rank method. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

[EM] SFC, CC, MMC

you prefer? Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 election-methods mailing list - see http

[EM] Warren: MDDA vs RV, 10/16/05

own elaborate strategy considerations, and to find out if ranking can improve on Approval and RV, MDDA's strategy must be discussed. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http

[EM] Rob: MDDA, 10/15/05

: 2. Are LNH and the Favorite Betrayal Criterion (FBC) mutually incompatible? I reply: Doesn't MMPO meet both? You continued: 3. Are LNH, SFC and FBC mutually incompatible? I reply: Doesn't MMPO meet all of those? But regrettably, MMPO has a big problem, as Kevin pointed out. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Re: Why it doesn't matter if prefer means anything

, that voter shouldn't entirely blame my definition. Surely she would have to admit that she contributed at least partly to the definition-mismatch by having intransitive preferences. Mike Ossipoff Mike Ossipoff _ On the road

[EM] A more briefly-defined method with the best mix of properties

it's possible to get SFC in combination with FBC. Compare the stark simpliclity of MDDA to the long definition of Schulze's method. Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security

[EM] Deluxe MDDA

asking for additional information in the form of an Approval cutoff. Both MDDA versions meet FBC, SFC, and SDSC. Deluxe MDDA's deluxeness isn't needed, and for a first proposal, I suggest ordinary MDDA, defined in my previous posting. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Statue language for MDDA

, the requirement to not count a ballot that assigns more than one rank number to one candidate is included for simplicity. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http

[EM] Power Truncation

, by making MDDA strategy as simple as that of Approval in an acceptable/unacceptable situation, would be valuable, I don't propose power truncation for a first MDDA proposal. For a first proposal, I propose MDDA, in the plain and briefly-defined form for which I have sent the statue language. Mike

[EM] A precise abstract definition of prefer

, but criteria are only used during the discussion of an example. Mike Ossipoff _ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement

[EM] Why it doesn't matter if prefer means anything

, an SFC failure example can or cannot be written are just as valid, regardless of what nonsense word you substitute for prefer. Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click

[EM] How does one write to or join the Toby Nixon Condorcet mailing list?

I've unsuccessfully searched the web for that mailing list, and a way to write to it or join it (in order to write to it). How can that be accomplished? Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download

[EM] Why SFC is better than Condorcet's Criterion

will win means that if there's a unique winner it will be either the CW or someone you like better. But in any case, it certainly isn't less of a guarantee. Obviously the same comparison can be made between the Smith Criterion and GSFC. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Rob: MDDA vs BeatpathWinner

. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

[EM] Ken's SFC objections, contd.

Ken: You say: Sorry Mike, I should have said I don't see the purpose of the criterion, rather than the value of.. I reply: That's perfectly ok. Don't apologize for that. It's perfectly valid for you not see the value of a criterion, just as it's valid for you not to see the purpose

[EM] Reply to SFC objection

be called Smith's Criterion for majorities. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ Election-methods mailing list - see http

[EM] Alternative SFC wording

a preference, but this wording is more realistic and useful. Rob, would you put this at the electowicki? Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01

[EM] O/D

MDDA has been enacted, power truncation could be proposed as a subsequent proposal. Maybe later, deluxe MDDA. So MDDA can start out starkly simple, and be improved incrementally later. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly

[EM] MDDA

. The advantages that I mentioned for O/D over MDDA are Approval's simple acceptable/unacceptable strategy, without power truncation; and it can have full ranking expressivity without the separate Approval cutoff by which Deluxe MDDA achieves that. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Rob: SFC and your 2nd statement

falsify a preference. It's only necessary that people don't falsify preferences in sufficient numbers to change the election result. Mike Ossipoff _ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get

[EM] Majority criteria

, RV seems a much easier and more winnable proposal, due to its simplicly, public familiarity, and public populariy. And Weak Majority Criterion compliance and WDSC compliance do much to make up for RV not meeting MC. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Rob reply: FBC vs CC. SFC. RV.,

in order to let more choice-power be had by people to whom the choice is more important? Shouldn't they be free to do as they wish? They could strategize, to maximize their applied strength, if they wished to. Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC

[EM] Rob: Condorcet's Criterion vs FBC. Will people favorite-bury?

need that assurance, and who, therefore, can benefit from the assurance that SFC compliance gives. If it were up to me, public elections would use MDDA. Realistically, I propose RV, with more rating-levels than Approval. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Deluxe MDDA

one wants to equal-top-rank the acceptables and power-truncate the unacceptables. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ Election

[EM] Anthony reply

will vote, and that was to be expected, but the turnout has been good, most of the active list participants. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct

[EM] ERBucklin(whole) typo

conditions I spoke of earlier. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ Election-methods mailing list - see http

[EM] Better-worded definition of ERBucklin(whole)

ERBucklin(whole): Voters rank as many candidates as they want to in order of preference. Equal ranking and truncation are permitted. There are a series of vote-giving rounds. In each round, every ranking gives one whole vote (each) to one or more candidates as described in the next

[EM] MCA

the candidates? I reply: Yes, that's MDDA. In its standard definition, in MDDA a ballot gives an Approval vote to (only) all the candidates that it ranks. Mike Ossiopff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http

[EM] Re: Bucklin

. And it surely is better than SR. By the way I prefer Approval to SR too. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01

[EM] DMC majority defensive strategy criteria

as the CWY majority vote sincerely, and no one falsifies, Y must lose. They might not put their Approval cutoff between CW and Y. Say they approve both or neither, but the YCW minority all approve Y, but not the CW? DMC probably doesn't meet SFC. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Jobst: SFC

ask for any conditions, and is made individually to every voter. MDDA meets SFC and FBC. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01

[EM] Bucklin

that ERBucklin(whole) is better than SR for public elections. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ Election

[EM] Re: SR

, their FBC compliance isn't so necessary, and BeatpathWinner's GSFC is a bonus. And, to a lesser extent, its Condorcet Criterion and Smith Criterion. So it seems to me that BeatpathWinner CSSD win the comparison for such use. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Thanks for the answers about DMC

that is contradicted by the order of the Approval scores. Anyone then unbeaten wins. [end of definition] Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01

[EM] Moral standing of Approval?

beat each of the others in separate two-candidate races. But that standard isn't everything, and Approval RV would bring tremendous benefit. For instance, Approval or RV would be much better than any Condorcet Criterion method other than wv Condorcet. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Re: Condorcet's strategy problem

to your favorite, and voting someone overe your favorite. [Rob continues]: We'll have to agree to disagree, because [absolute avoidance of favorite betrayal] is not my goal. [Mike replies:] Ok, but when people are afraid to show full support for their favorite, Democracy becomes a joke. You

[EM] Re: Condorcet's strategy problem

relatively sincere voting. Electing a CW will often depend on that. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01

[EM] A few brief replies

, and be willing to accept the expense and effort of a 2nd balloting. So RV seems like the easiest to ask for, of all the good public voting systems. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http

[EM] Re: Condorcet's strategy problem

maximize the probability of the winner being an acceptable candidate. And that could be so even if there is no information available about whether or not that special FBC-failure situation exists. You continued: This runs contrary to what Mike suggest, which is that voters will reverse order unless

[EM] Rob: Condorcet's strategy problem

an acceptable/unacceptable situation and wants to vote optimally will favorite-bury if it would maximize the probability that the winner will be an acceptable candidate. Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get

[EM] Condorcet's strategy problem

exclusively, and let its winner be the organization's choice. It depends on how you want to balance 1)The properties desired for your own application vs 2)Setting precedent for a good and winnable publc method. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Re: Condorcet's strategy problem

for a BeatpathWinner FBC failure example, but I hope others will too, because it isn't so easy to find one. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go

[EM] Quitting EM

-evils problem that requires FBC compliance, will then be the best public method. Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid

[EM] Try power truncation in the simulation

assume that every truncation is a power truncation. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ Election-methods

[EM] Corrected ballot

[beginning of ballot] The problem with our Plurality voting system is that many voters feel compelled to vote for a lesser-evil, abandoning their favorite. The voting systems below were chosen because, with them, no one ever has any incentive or reason to vote someone over their favorite.

[EM] That most ambitious criterion

any other criterion compliances should be traded. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ Election-methods mailing list - see http

[EM] Re: Miscellaneous comments on MMPO MDDA

/unacceptable situation, and power truncation is available and everyone votes optimally. to be continued. There isn't time to check this for errors, but I'll hope for the best. Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer

[EM] Contd., Miscellaneous comments on MMPO MDDA

it for MDDA over MMPO? Too bad, because there were things I liked about MMPO. But if someone showed that example during the enactment campaign, we might as well forget about MMPO being enacted. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself

[EM] MMPO vs MDDA, contd.

of simplicity for a rank method. But the example that you posted seems to finish MMPO as a public proposal. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01

[EM] Suggested ballot for public poll on voting systems

that Kevin posted. Well, that's good in a way, because it simplifies the choice of a rank method for public proposals. Mike Ossipoff _ Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go

[EM] I left out the box for MDDA on the ballot. Corrected ballot.

I suggest this ballot, or one like it, for public polling on voting systems: [beginning of ballot] The problem with our Plurality voting system is that many voters feel compelled to vote for a lesser-evil, abandoning their favorite. The voting systems below were chosen because, with them, no

[EM] My MDDA ICC failure example was poorly-written

Sorry, my MDDA ICC failure-example wasn't well-written. Maybe I can write an MDDA ICC bad-example, but if I post one, it will be one that I've checked out more carefully than that other one that I posted. Mike Ossipoff

[EM] Russ: Abuses

I'd said: Saddam probably intimidated voters. Russ says: Probably?!!! Yes, Mike, I suppose it is possible that Saddam got 99.96% of the vote because he was sincerely loved! I reply: No, he might have merely reported a fraudulent count result, as did Ferdinand Marcos and the Bush people

[EM] Miscellaneous MMPO MDDA comments.

complicated, because that would spoil it as a public proposal. The beauty of Approval, CR, MMPO and MDDA is their simplicity, in addition to their FBC compliance. Mike Ossipoff _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan

[EM] MMPO vs MDDA

LNH and SDSC would then be a factor in the choice between MMPO MDDA. Mike Ossipoff _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01

[EM] Mr. Lomax's non'-reply, part 1

administration could do another terrorist attack, as they did 9-11, if they deem it necessary. Mr. Lomax says: Now, certain obvious injustices existing in the Muslim world have been mentioned here [by Mike, whom I won't name, because I don't reply to him], as if these injustices were somehow

[EM] Part 2, Mr. Lomax's posting

democracy would be better accepted when people have seen how effectively they can implement what they want, with better voting systems. Mike Ossipoff _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >