At 8:03 PM -0800 11/15/04, Bart Ingles wrote:
What would be an example of a spoiler (ICC or other violation) which
is NOT an irrelevant alternative?
With IIA, the spoiler is a candidate that is either added or removed
from the ballots.
With ICC, the spoiler is among the ballots already.
]
] On Behalf Of Eric Gorr
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 3:01 PM
To: EM List
Subject: Re: [EM] IRV in San Francisco
At 8:03 PM -0800 11/15/04, Bart Ingles wrote:
What would be an example of a spoiler (ICC or other violation) which
is NOT an irrelevant alternative?
With IIA, the spoiler
At 3:14 PM -0600 11/16/04, Paul Kislanko wrote:
No one can be added or removed
from a ballot after the votes have been counted,
Sure one can...just do it and recalculate.
so by this distinction
there is no such thing as an IIA spoiler.
I believe there is.
Compute the winner.
Start removing
Eric Gorr replied to my questions:
At 3:14 PM -0600 11/16/04, Paul Kislanko wrote:
No one can be added or removed
from a ballot after the votes have been counted,
Sure one can...just do it and recalculate.
so by this distinction
there is no such thing as an IIA spoiler.
I believe
Eric Gorr asked a lot of questions
So, you now believe there is such a thing as an IIA spoiler?
I never said I didn't. I just said I couldn't get that there was from your
definition:
With IIA, the spoiler is a candidate that is either added or removed
from the ballots.
With ICC, the
In a method that mistreats clones, a clone is an irrelevant alternative.
Dropping a non-winning clone, allowing the other non-winning clone to win,
violates the desired independence of irrelevant alternatives.
Thus, everything that violates the clone criterion, violates independence
of
PROTECTED]
Subject: Irrelevant Vs. Clone (was RE: [EM] IRV in San Francisco)
In a method that mistreats clones, a clone is an irrelevant
alternative.
Dropping a non-winning clone, allowing the other non-winning
clone to win,
violates the desired independence of irrelevant alternatives.
Thus
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Paul Kislanko wrote:
The original question was how to define the word spoiler, and I've come to
the conclusion that it cannot be used at all without some qualification. An
IRV-spoiler might be a clone or it might be an IA, and it can be one
without being both.
A spoiler is the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Paul Kislanko wrote:
The original question was how to define the word spoiler, and I've
come to
the conclusion that it cannot be used at all without some
qualification. An
IRV-spoiler might be a clone or it might be an IA, and it can be one
without
At 8:16 PM -0800 11/14/04, Bart Ingles wrote:
Eric Gorr wrote:
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler effect again.
Doesn't IRV suffer from
Eric Gorr wrote:
At 8:16 PM -0800 11/14/04, Bart Ingles wrote:
Eric Gorr wrote:
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones
Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler effect again.
Eric Gorr wrote:
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones
Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler effect again.
Doesn't IRV suffer from spoiler effects anyway?
Depends.
The method
1) Did the ballot only allow each voter to give the top three choices? I
suspect that restriction would significantly decrease the effectiveness of
IRV.
2) I suspect the root cause of the crappy election software used is
gullible non-technical election clerks making purchasing decisions. As a
At 10:11 AM -0500 11/12/04, Warren Schudy wrote:
1) Did the ballot only allow each voter to give the top three choices? I
suspect that restriction would significantly decrease the effectiveness of
IRV.
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones Criterion
and thereby be subject to
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
At 10:11 AM -0500 11/12/04, Warren Schudy wrote:
1) Did the ballot only allow each voter to give the top three choices?
I suspect that restriction would significantly decrease the
effectiveness of IRV.
Yes, three choices. The City Charter says that
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:12:36 -0800 (PST) Justin Sampson wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Brian Olson wrote:
Between this story and all of the snafu going on with the DRE voting
machines, my appraisal of the quality of software engineering in this
country is going down. Even Microsoft could do better.
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler effect again.
Doesn't IRV suffer from spoiler effects anyway?
Depends.
The method itself passes the
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:06:23 -0500 Eric Gorr wrote:
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones
Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler effect again.
Doesn't IRV suffer from spoiler
At 1:47 PM -0500 11/12/04, Dave Ketchum wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:06:23 -0500 Eric Gorr wrote:
At 7:44 AM -0800 11/12/04, Justin Sampson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Eric Gorr wrote:
Well, it will cause IRV to fail the Independence of Clones Criterion and
thereby be subject to a spoiler
On Nov 10, 2004, at 9:54 PM, Toplak Jurij wrote:
the computer program written to tabulate votes choked on the
unanticipated large number of ballots.
That makes me sad. I wrote software that can easily count 1,000,000 IRV
votes.
According to
Brian Olson wrote:
Between this story and all of the snafu going on with the DRE voting
machines, my appraisal of the quality of software engineering in this
country is going down. Even Microsoft could do better.
Maybe they outsourced it.
Election-methods mailing list - see
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Brian Olson wrote:
Between this story and all of the snafu going on with the DRE voting
machines, my appraisal of the quality of software engineering in this
country is going down. Even Microsoft could do better.
As a software engineer I'm certainly apalled but not really
22 matches
Mail list logo
