Well, one thing you always can do is to write a letter to the editor pointing
out their errors, and embarass the paper in public. You need to do this almost
immediately, as there is a general rule of journalistic ethics regarding the
publication of such correctional letters in a timely manner.
Thank you, Forrest.
It's been a decade since Real Analysis, and the name, apparently, lingered
longer than it's meaning.
-Original Message-
From: Forest Simmons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:52 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [EM] WSJ Gerrymander
Joe Weinstein wrote:
Short of forcing everyone into a single district, with resulting
guaranteed huge campaign costs for small parties or obscure candidacies,
it's NOT necessarily easier to maximize overall geographic fitness
or 'utility' of an apportionment scheme by using PR.
By the way,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, [iso-8859-1] Alex Small wrote:
Good point about geographical concerns. In a bicameral state legislature
it would be reasonable to elect one house by PR and the other with single-
member districts. We can debate which house of the legislature should be
elected by PR,
Joe Weinstein wrote and Alex responded:
usual PR presumes that voters want to be proportionally
represented ONLY according to political party, not other criteria,
including geographic proximity.
Good point about geographical concerns. In a bicameral state legislature
it would be reasonable to
From: Forest Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Working with journalists
That's helpful. Ideally, there should be some back and
forth on these things that don't have urgent deadlines, so
that the final version that gets published is acceptable
to both author and publisher, or
With Proxy P.R. there can be some sort of semi-permanent districts -- 1 or
more political subdivisions or part of 1 subdivision.
Proxy P.R. = Each winner has a voting power in the legislative body equal to
the number of votes that he/she finally receives (directly and from losers).
At least 2
From the bloomberg Newswire (Mar 18, 4:03PM)
What was the correction you sent them?
Oh, not this story, I didn't know she had the facts wrong.
I did send the author of this story an URL or two about Condorcet. I also
claimed that there was nothing undemocratic about IRV.
Other stories were
Adam Tarr wrote:
Also, I think PR should stick to districts of 5 or 6 members, rather than
operating state-wide, to keep the district sizes half-way reasonable.
Whether this is necessary really depends on the election method. If the
election is done using open party list, then voting is very
If the
election is done using open party list, then voting is very simple no
matter how many candidates there are.
My concern is not the method. My concern is that electoral districts be a
reasonable size so that campaign costs aren't unmanageable. Also, I worry
that if each party's slate is
Adam wrote in part-
These are valid concerns, which, along with practical voting and counting
concerns, argue against very large districts. On the other hand, if you have
small districts you don't get real proportionality. In my opinion, you have
to
have at least 5 or 6 seats in a district
Joe Weinstein wrote:
By the way, usual PR presumes that voters want to be proportionally
represented ONLY according to political party, not other criteria,
including geographic proximity. That's as mistaken as the present
one-rep one-locality fiasco. Also by the way, we would get much
I wrote and Alex responded:
if you have small districts you don't get real proportionality. In my
opinion, you have to have at least 5 or 6 seats in a district to get
acceptably proportional results. The more fractionalized the electorate
is, the more seats per district you need.
I'm not
From: Alex Small [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [EM] Working with journalists
Anthony Simmons wrote:
I tried to explain that petroleum is a source of new energy, while
hydrogen gas contains energy that has to be put there by us from some
other source.
Maybe this is just a semantic issue
14 matches
Mail list logo
