Stephane Rouillon Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 2:41 AM
> I never said that the electorate will was to identify itself
> to some political parties.
I never said you did. MY comments (in full below) made absolutely no mention
of political parties.
I was concerned only to draw the distinction in mu
Juho just showed another way of using time to get some efficiency
without sacrifying fairness. A better example than any I could provide...
My sincere congratulations,
Steph.
Juho Laatu a écrit :
> Hello James,
>
> In the pirate example one could take a step in the direction of
> proportional re
James,
I never said that the electorate will was to identify itself
to some political parties.
You mix the fact that I use political parties in SPPA to simplify ballot
treatment
in order to get nearer our common objective (a representative chamber that is
independent of party lines) and the fact
On Behalf Of Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 8:30 PM
>
> Proportional Representation, of course, advances the diversity position,
> but also is based on a party system.
You are considering only one version of PR, ie party PR. With STV-PR (choice
voting) there need be no parties
Hello Stephane,
Yes. Electoral methods should aim at electing the candidate that is
best for the planned period (based on the will of the electors as
expressed in the ballots). Repetitive mutinies are thus something one
need not normally prepare for.
If the community can agree what the "util
Hello James,
In the pirate example one could take a step in the direction of
proportional representation and give up the original idea of single
winner elections. It is the captain that is to be elected, and there is
a tradition of having only one captain on a ship. In this situation one
coul
At 06:25 AM 5/27/2005, James Gilmour wrote:
Those
steeped in social choice theory believe that the purpose of a voting
system should be to maximise representation of
consensus among the electors. But there is a much older view: that the
purpose of a voting system should be to maximise
represe
At 12:43 AM 5/27/2005, Stephane Rouillon wrote:
Criterias and electoral methods [...] are not meant to
cope for a fractionated electorate. An electoral system
goal is to get the electorate will, whatever it is.
Actually, the goal of electoral systems is to reduce the electorate will to
a decis
Stephane Rouillon Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 5:44 AM
> Criterias and electoral methods hare not meant to
> cope for a fractionated electorate. An electoral system
> goal is to get the electorate will, whatever it is.
This may be true for single-winner elections, eg city mayor, state governor,
b
Pirates should, after some repetitive election,
see the wisdom of defining a mandate length before
knowing who wins...
Criterias and electoral methods hare not meant to
cope for a fractionated electorate. An electoral system
goal is to get the electorate will, whatever it is. Stability
is a furth
Hello James,
Some further comments on the two tracks (= two scenarios on what mutiny
may mean in elections). Sorry that the mail is long (maybe too long and
difficult to read for those who have not followed the discussion).
Best Regards,
Juho
On Mar 19, 2005, at 04:38, James Green-Armytage wrot
Hi Juho,
Further replies follow on the topic of Smith methods vs.
minimax(margins)...
>
>Sorry about causing some gray hair to you.
Sorry about being peevish in my reply.
track one
>
>one where we talk about dynamics of
>sequential mutinies and how
Hello James,
Sorry about causing some gray hair to you. I think the problem is that
we drove into two alternative tracks in the discussion and my text,
when trying to address both of these, was not clear. I hope this mail
improves the situation a bit.
The two tracks that I see are one where we
Hi, this is James G-A replying to Juho...
>
>My assumption was that the fact that there are four parties of about
>equal size was known. Since I at some point said that these pirates
>would be from different countries, maybe also the exact number of
>people in each party is known. In most elect
Hello James,
You wondered how familiar I am with different strategies etc. I have
studied the voting methods for quite some time and I have visited also
Blake Cretney's web site. I think I know most of the basic stuff but
unfortunately have not had time to follow all the details of the
disc
Hello James,
Thanks for the excellent mail. I still found some points where
different definitions lead to different conclusions. See (lengthy)
comments below.
BR, Juho
On Mar 17, 2005, at 09:51, James Green-Armytage wrote:
I suggest that most public elections will fall within the region of
"som
Hi Juho,
Various replies follow, on the subject of voter strategy.
>Condorcet is close to a dream come true in the sense that it almost
>provides a perfect solution that eliminates all strategies from
>elections and frees people to giving sincere votes only.
This is true only i
>
Hi Juho,
My critique of your pro-minimax(margins) argument follows...
>I tend to see margins as "natural" and winning votes as something that
>deviates from the more natural margins but that might be used somewhere
>to eliminate strategic voting. (not a very scientific description but
Hello James,
As more or less promised, here are some comments on the rest of your
mail.
BR,
Juho
3. Condorcet and strategies
Condorcet is close to a dream come true in the sense that it almost
provides a perfect solution that eliminates all strategies from
elections and frees people to giving
Hello James,
I wrote a long mail. Sorry about that. No need to reply on everything
word in it. I however felt that it is worth writing all the text, just
in case it would trigger some useful thoughts. Simple answer "thanks
but I'm not convinced of the merits of non-Smith-set candidates yet" is
Hi Juho,
About your "least additional votes" method: Correct me if I'm wrong, but
I think that your method is equivalent to minimax (margins). Adding an
additional "vote" will decrease the margin of each of a candidates defeats
by one. So, the candidate whose widest-margin defeat is less w
Hello James,
Here is some feedback on point 1. I didn't find yet time to write a proper answer also to point 3 but I'm planning to comment also that.
1. Majority and Smith set
Yes, one should respect the majority opinion. My thinking however goes so that in some situations some majority opinio
22 matches
Mail list logo
