>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: Majority? Expressivity? Strategy?
>> Mr. Moore wrote--
>> So I don't really see the point of the example.
>> -
>> D- The point is to require majority support for
>> choices for executive and judicial
Mr. Moore wrote--
So I don't really see the point of the example.
-
D- The point is to require majority support for choices for executive and
judicial offices for the obvious reason that majority support is required to
pass ballot issues and enact laws (if there is no supermajority requirem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> D- Another example-
>
> A pre-election poll indicates-
>
> A 34
> B 33
> C 32
>
>99
>
> Does anybody vote for second choices if a majority requirement is NOT
> required in the election (as for President, Governor or Mayor) ???
What method are you asking about?
Und
l Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Majority? Expressivity? Strategy?
> Mr. Moore wrote--
>
> On "majority rule": I don't rate it as high on my list of criteria as,
say,
> monoto
Mr. Moore wrote--
On "majority rule": I don't rate it as high on my list of criteria as, say,
monotonicity.
---
D- Another example-
A pre-election poll indicates-
A 34
B 33
C 32
99
Does anybody vote for second choices if a majority requirement is NOT
required in the election (as for Presi
> For the benefit of newer folks --- I again suggest that only YES majority
> (above zero utility) choices get elected to executive and judicial offices.
Mr. Moore wrote in part-
What do you mean, "above zero utility"? What are the upper and lower bounds
of utility? Many on this list use a util
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> For the benefit of newer folks --- I again suggest that only YES majority
> (above zero utility) choices get elected to executive and judicial offices.
What do you mean, "above zero utility"? What are the upper and lower bounds
of utility? Many on this list use a util
Joe wrote:
>
>STRATEGY?
>
>The most sophisticated argument given in these postings against higher-res
>grading [at least as v. Approval = two-level grading] is that of so-called
>'strategic collapse': 'strategically', a higher-res method allegedly calls
>simply for voting as one might in Approva
Mr. Weinstein wrote in part-
The holy grail and battle cry of 'majority' are not only Demorep's etc.
D- Yes indeed compared to the minority rule murder/slave regimes of the
nazis and communists in the 1900's (and their evil monarchial/ oligarchial
predecessors for the last 6,000 plus year
MAJORITY?
Demorep sometimes deftly clarifies EM-issues. On the issue of 'majority', he
has just written (3/29/01):
"Approval has the elementary defect of permitting a *real* first choice
majority winner to lose (if *real* rankings were being used)."
Demorep gives a 100-voter example, namely A
10 matches
Mail list logo
