[EM] What is this software MIKE is working on...

[David GLAUDE]

One of the side effect of the Markus and Mike chat is that I understand 
Mike is programing something... The more I think about it, the more I 
believe it might be this:
http://www.fairvote.org/ChoicePlus/
http://votingsolutions.com/

If it is... I will come with more on that...

But if the author of that piece of code are on this list... I can talk 
about it here too.

David GLAUDE

MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
> 
> Ernie,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> Can we chill? We're all Condorcet-lovers, after all.   Mike probably
> used the term Floyd inappropriately.
> 
> I reply:
> 
> But that isn't anything different from what I'd already been saying.
> Early in this discussion, I said that I'm not longer saying that 
> anything is the Floyd algorithm.
> I'd assumed that Markus had miscopied an algorithm that made as many 
> permutations passes as necessary. Markus says that he'd written it 
> right, because it only needs one pass. Markus says that he really meant 
> to write the algorithm as he did, and that that is the Floyd algorithm. 
> I said "Ok".
> So why is Markus still having such a problem about it? I have no idea, 
> but that's how he always is.
> 
> You continued:
> 
> I suspect that we're really experiencing a clash of cultures.
> 
> I reply:
> 
> Excuse me?
> 
> You continued:
> 
> Markus
> appears to be operating from a math/compsci perspective
> 
> I reply:
> 
> Markus is operating in a "making-up-fictitious-quotes" perspective.
> 
> Math and comuter-science have nothing to do with it at all.
> 
> You continued:
> 
> , where terms
> mean something different than they do in Mike.
> 
> I reply:
> 
> I agree that everything seems to mean something different to Markus. In 
> particular, Markus evidently has a different perspective on the matter 
> of whther he should check the accuracy of what he's about to post.
> 
> But if you're referring to mathematical terms, then tell me what 
> mathematical term I have a different meaning for, resulting in the 
> misunderstanding.
> 
> It isn't "Floyd algorithm", because I've already repeated many many 
> times that I now don't claim to know what it means, and that the meaning 
> of that term doesn't matter to me.
> 
> You continued:
> 
> As a physicist, I'm
> used to abusing mathematical terminology, so I can appreciate the
> dilemma. :-)
> 
> But what mathematical terminology is being abused now?
> 
> You continued:
> 
> I suspect part of the problem is that the term 'shortest path'  in the
> Flloyd algorithm is used for finding what Mike calls a BeatPath.
> 
> I reply:
> 
> What I call a beatpath is a sequence of defeats from one candidate to 
> another (informal definition).
> So Floyd calls that a shortest path, and uses it to find a beatpath?
> 
> You continued:
> 
> The
> comparison of such paths to find the strongest beatpath is actually
> after the Flloyd algorithm.
> 
> I reply:
> 
> So something called "shortest paths" are used to find the strongest 
> beatpath?
> 
> Ok.
> 
> I don't know if "shortest path" is a mathematical term, but I wasn't 
> really taking a position on what it means. What I did say was that I 
> agreed that the Floyd algorithm sounds different from our strongest 
> beatpaths algorithm, because our algorithm seeks the strongest path 
> betwen 2 candidates, not the shortest one.
> 
> But if you say that finding the shortest path between two candidates can 
> somehow be part of some method for finding the strongest one, l of 
> course wouldn't try to contradict you on that. It isn't something that 
> I  would take a position on.
> 
> Mike Ossipoff
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of slow downloads? Compare online deals from your local high-speed 
> providers now.  https://broadband.msn.com
> 
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
> 
> 

--