Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Forest Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > If I had your definition (of voting method) in your language (formal or
> > not), I might be able to give a definition (to your satisfaction) of what
> > I consider a voting system to be in the same (or si
Forest Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I had your definition (of voting method) in your language (formal or
> not), I might be able to give a definition (to your satisfaction) of what
> I consider a voting system to be in the same (or similar) language, so
> that you could, for example,
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Richard Moore wrote:
> Craig may have a genuine problem understanding some of the
> statements made on this list (though most of the time I
> think it's plain disingenuity, or that's how it comes
> across), but his bigger problem is that he just doesn't know
> how to ask f
Dave Ketchum wrote:
> Aha! Levels seems clear from Condorcet for 10 candidates having 10 levels.
>
> But then you say you can have something in 2 levels that you also call Condorcet.
Now I understand where the confusion comes from. I really
didn't say something with only two levels could be
http://www.irpp.org/po/index.htm
back issues [link]
Policy Options, Jul-Aug 2001 (Canada politics magazine)
[PDF articles in such issue (summaries below) --- to give EM folks some idea
about what mere mortals are thinking about various election reforms. Canada
has the single member di
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in part:
>
> Simple Approval is defective since head to head math is not done (with or
> without a quota).
>
Buddha Buck recently showed in gory detail that the head to head count on
a two level ballot yields the Approval winnner.
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Craig Carey wrote:
>
> Forest Simmons is sort of arguing for the rights of electorates but not
> for rights of voters.
>
Actually I wasn't arguing for anybody's rights. I was more interested in
customer satisfaction.
Perhaps you read "partition" as "petition" , or it cou
On 26 Sep 2001, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Forest wrote:
> >
> > If candidate A wins DECISIVELY in all the subsets in some partition of the
> > electorate (by restricting the election to the ballots from each of the
> > subsets of the partition in turn) then candidate A wins the entire
> > election
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote-
Oops, guess I had the wrong quota method in mind. I think
there was another Demorep proposal that was named by you,
and defined as Approval with 50% quota. Or maybe that was
yet another variation. Too tired to go checking the archives
right now.
If it isn't named yet
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 23:39:17 -0700 Richard Moore wrote in part:
>
> Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
> > On the other side, "Two levels" puzzles me - if I had more time for this
> > group I might have got this from context, but I could have been asking
> > the same question (e.g., this could have been tied
10 matches
Mail list logo
