Hi all,
You guys caught me sleeping. This is the type of discussion I joined the
list to chime in on :)
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Well, I thi
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> You guys caught me sleeping. This is the type of discussion I joined the
> list to chime in on :)
Heh :)
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Here's how it would work. Voters rank all candidates or options, but also
> p
On 21-Nov-00, 03:42 (CST), Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Here's how it would work. Voters rank all candidates or options, but also
> > put in a "cut line" above which all candidates/options are
Steve Greenland wrote:
> I'm not sure it really makes any sense to have alternatives with
> different majority requirements[1]. The recent case of an ammendment
> that had an (arguably) different requirement than the original GR came
> from two issues:
I agree with you that supermajority requirem
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Norman Petry wrote:
> status quo, it must do so against 3-1 odds (or whatever). Therefore, to
> determine the winner, just multiply the votes for the status quo by 3
> against every alternative before comparing. For example, suppose we have
> the following pair of vote total
Dear Buddha,
you wrote (14 Nov 2000):
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how
> Condorcet-based voting schemes work in the face of
> a supermajority requirement?
>
> My understanding of Condorcet is that a ballot like
> Anthony Towns used as an example ("Remove non-free
> // We Love no
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 08:43:44AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 21-Nov-00, 03:42 (CST), Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > > On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > > Here's how it would work. Voters rank all candidates or options
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:00:05AM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Have you read A.6.7 (and A.6.8) of the debian constitution?
--
Raul
Hi all,
You guys caught me sleeping. This is the type of discussion I joined the
list to chime in on :)
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Well, I th
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> You guys caught me sleeping. This is the type of discussion I joined the
> list to chime in on :)
Heh :)
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Here's how it would work. Voters rank all candidates or options, but also
>
On 21-Nov-00, 03:42 (CST), Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Here's how it would work. Voters rank all candidates or options, but also
> > put in a "cut line" above which all ca
Steve Greenland wrote:
> I'm not sure it really makes any sense to have alternatives with
> different majority requirements[1]. The recent case of an ammendment
> that had an (arguably) different requirement than the original GR came
> from two issues:
I agree with you that supermajority require
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Norman Petry wrote:
> status quo, it must do so against 3-1 odds (or whatever). Therefore, to
> determine the winner, just multiply the votes for the status quo by 3
> against every alternative before comparing. For example, suppose we have
> the following pair of vote tota
Dear Buddha,
you wrote (14 Nov 2000):
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how
> Condorcet-based voting schemes work in the face of
> a supermajority requirement?
>
> My understanding of Condorcet is that a ballot like
> Anthony Towns used as an example ("Remove non-free
> // We Love n
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 08:43:44AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 21-Nov-00, 03:42 (CST), Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 12:30:28AM -0800, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > > On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > > Here's how it would work. Voters rank all c
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:00:05AM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Could someone explain to me, in simple terms, how Condorcet-based
> voting schemes work in the face of a supermajority requirement?
Have you read A.6.7 (and A.6.8) of the debian constitution?
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
16 matches
Mail list logo
