On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 01:02:23 -0400 Eric Gorr wrote:
Thinking about this some more and based on a private comment from James,
I think the only natural division that might actually garner general
agreement is to have a single division...multi-winner and single-winner
methods.
Certainly multi- vs
Eric Gorr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thinking about this some more and based on a private comment from
James, I think the only natural division that might actually garner
general agreement is to have a single division...multi-winner and
single-winner methods.
Allow things like whether a method
Tom Ruen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Reading some of the replies here, it would appear what is apparent to me
is not apparent to others. The separation of single vote methods and
multiple vote methods would seem a clear one at least to me.
I think I understand what you're getting at, Tom,
Tom Ruen wrote:
Does anyone know a single locale anywhere in the world that
has political elections for single winners that uses a
multiple vote method?
Adam Tarr replied:
Several online groups of nontrivial size use Condorcet, and
Approval is used by international organizations with
James Gilmour wrote:
Are you, Adam, suggesting that Condorcet is not a one person, one vote
system? No voter can give more than one vote to any one candidate. When
it comes to any decision, ie pair-wise comparison, each voter's vote
counts for only one candidate. That would seem to satisfy
I wrote
Or did you have in mind the situation when a Condorcet cycle exists, so
that the vote of a voter who has marked more than one preference counts
for more than one candidate at the same time? In that particular
situation one might also argue that the voter's second
preference was
Dear Adam,
you wrote (5 June 2004):
Approval is used by international organizations with
tens of thousands of members (including the IEEE).
The IEEE (ca. 377,000 members) abolished Approval
Voting in 2002. Today, the largest organization that
uses Approval Voting is the Mathematical
Someone identified only by IP address modified the Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributionstarget=128.211.150.75
Would someone like to take the credit?
My category one vote method (where voters are limited to a single
selection) was converted to a Up/Down
On Jun 4, 2004, at 6:21 PM, Eric Gorr wrote:
Thought people here would be interested in this message...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/instantrunoff-freewheeling/message/779
Thanks, I'd missed that change. Perhaps people here could help on the
taxonomy question:
At 6:51 PM -0700 6/4/04, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
On Jun 4, 2004, at 6:21 PM, Eric Gorr wrote:
Thought people here would be interested in this message...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/instantrunoff-freewheeling/message/779
Thanks, I'd missed that change.
What I was most interested in was his
At 11:58 PM -0400 6/4/04, James Green-Armytage wrote:
Did Tom actually change the Wikipedia page? I didn't find the changed
page when I looked. I hope that he didn't change it.
Yes, he did. I can see the changes there now.
--
== Eric Gorr = http://www.ericgorr.net =
At 11:58 PM -0400 6/4/04, James Green-Armytage wrote:
So far, I don't fully understand why is IRV a single vote method, Borda
count a multiple vote method, and Condorcet a pairwise vote method,
when they are all ranked ballot single-winner systems that can be
conducted in a single round. There's
12 matches
Mail list logo
