| From: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Election results |
| Date: | 2007-08-07 20:01:25 |
| Message-ID: | 20070807200125.GA31102@phlogiston.dyndns.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | spi-announce spi-general |
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 09:02:44PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
>
> Condorcet is a single-winner method. Proportionality is a nonsensical
> requirement for single-winner elections.
Sure. But given that we have apparently adapted Condorcet rules for
multi-winners, my point was just that the whole point of Condorcet is
to optimise for some other set of conditions than proportionality of
preferences.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens."
--Bruce Schneier
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho | 2007-08-08 03:58:35 | Re: Election results |
| Previous Message | Jimmy Kaplowitz | 2007-08-07 19:17:43 | Re: Election results |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | MJ Ray | 2007-08-07 21:58:33 | Re: Making the ballots secret |
| Previous Message | Jimmy Kaplowitz | 2007-08-07 19:17:43 | Re: Election results |