Dear Mike,
you wrote (4 Feb 2002):
Markus wrote (4 Feb 2002):
In so far as IRV meets majority for solid coalitions and independence
from clones, IRV can hardly be called erratic compared to primary
with runoff.
IRV is erratic because it requires strict ordering, collects a ranking,
and
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Markus Schulze wrote in part:
My argument is that in so far as IRV meets majority for solid coalitions
and independence from clones, IRV can hardly be called erratic compared
to primary with runoff. You didn't address my argument. Check the
paragraph of mine that I
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Markus Schulze wrote:
Of course, then you have to explain why it is bad for an election method
to be erratic.
Adam gave the explanation in his example. My only contribution was to
describe the behavior of IRV as erratic in that context, and give a
homely analogy in
On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Blake Cretney wrote:
Joe Weinstein wrote:
As a citizen and voter, I don't want the election method to give
gratuitous incentive to CAMPAIGN strategies which aim to confuse and
entrap voters, e.g. thru introduction of incontestable fallacious poll
data or
Blake Cretney wrote:
But actually there's good reason to believe that reformers aren't
primarily concerned with the lesser-of-2-evils problem. The biggest
single-winner campaign is for IRV, and this is because reform advocates
often become obsessed with quite different strategy
On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Adam Tarr wrote (among other words):
I think that it is worth comparing methods that do not require ranked
ballots and methods that do require ranked ballots on separate
planes. Since methods that do not require ranked ballots tend to be very
easy to implement,
The standard circular tie-
34 ABC
33 BCA
32 CAB
99
Who is voting *sincerely* for their second choices ??
Are ALL of the second choice votes *insincere* votes based on lesser of 2
evils (Lo2E) ???
Expand for 4 or more choices.
If anybody can do the mindreading involved, then they deserve
The Center for Voting and Democracy has posted the minority rule math of many
of the lower houses of the various State legislatures (due to gerrymanders
and plurality winner elections-- greatly worse in reality due to plurality
(special interest gang) winners in D and R party primary elections
I haven't really had the chance to do anything with these, but these
definitions seem reasonable for analyzing any electoral college where some
members have more voting power than others:
Definition: An electoral college is a set EC of electors e_i with votes
v_i.
Note: All sets are
Anybody else interested in trying to speak out on this? Despite our
lack of consensus on many things, I think almost all of us feel that
IRVing is far from optimal in single winner elections.
Doug
How far along is the WA IRV proposal? Has it made the ballot yet?
As I understand it, there's an Alaska IRV proposal that has made
the ballot, and which will be voted on as a state initiative this
year. I don't know what month.
I've meant to find out the e-mail addresses of the opponents of
Anybody else interested in trying to speak out on this?
Despite our lack of consensus on many things, I think
almost all of us feel that IRVing is far from optimal in
single winner elections.
There's an IRV bill in Washington? I do know there's a bill
to replace the open primary with
Forest:
Just a minor correction. I think you must of meant to say there is a definite
strategic difference when the number of candidates exceeds [three], not
four.
Steve Barney
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 07:48:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Forest Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
The Electoral College is one of those totally evil so-called *Great
Compromises* in the Constitution --- along with slavery (blasted away in
1861-1865 at the cost of circa 620,000 dead folks and tens of thousands
maimed for life) and the minority rule U.S.A. Senate --- extorted in the 1787
Demorep-
Slow down, buddy. I don't like the EC any more than you do. But when I
introduce some definitions of voting power in the language of set theory
there's no need to remind us that one day a minority winner will start a
civil war. Take a deep breathe
Please don't take offense, I
15 matches
Mail list logo
