| From: | Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <antti-juhani(at)kaijanaho(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Election results |
| Date: | 2007-08-08 03:58:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20070808035833.GF5067@kukkaseppele.kaijanaho.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | spi-announce spi-general |
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 04:01:25PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> 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.
Obviously. However, I believe that this is *not* because the need for
proportionality has been rejected, but because the need for
proportionality has not been considered before.
As recently as last year, I personally was an advocate of the
iterate-Condorcet technique, not having thought its implications
through.
--
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Jyväskylä
http://antti-juhani.kaijanaho.fi/newblog/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antti-juhani/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-08-08 06:28:34 | Re: Election results |
| Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2007-08-07 20:01:25 | Re: Election results |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-08-08 06:28:34 | Re: Election results |
| Previous Message | Wichert Akkerman | 2007-08-07 22:31:47 | Re: Making the ballots secret |