[EM] Dimensions, Electoral College

[josh at narins.net]

On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 01:32:04AM +0200, Kevin Venzke wrote:
>  --- josh at narins.net a ?crit?: 
> > Condorcet can be represented on a line
> > but this matrix vote can not, which is what makes it planar
> 
> > although matrix ballots can be tabulated the same as condorcet, the
> > ballot itself can be more expressive (take an example of a person who
> > chooses Browne and Buchanan over Gore, but doesn't make a distinction
> > between Browne or Buchanan.)
> 
> That's a funny example.  Browne=Buchanan>Gore.  You want a matrix ballot
> just so you can do that?

No, my original example was better, when I had Gore, Nader, Bush,
Browne, Buchanan on the ballot.  Sorry, they aren't fun to type.

The issue is the EXPRESSIVENESS of the vote.  This is the ONLY
communication between the citizens and the government when it comes to
chusing(sic) leaders.

I am looking to MAXIMIZING the allowable, countable, expressions of this
singularly important political will :)

> > > > The Electoral College is _some_ defense, IF the malfeasance is traced
> > > > back to the opposition before the day they vote.
> > > 
> > > This made me laugh at you.  "A ballot of infinite pages would be ideal,
> > > but in the meantime, we have the Electoral College."
> > 
> > Actually, avoiding this type of problem is part of the stated reason for
> > the existence of the Electoral College, avoiding inflamed passions of
> > the voters.
> 
> You honestly believe the voters will check their own passions if you let
> them explain their reasoning on a 3D ballot?

My original post shows the appropriate example there, also.
Voter X for two states of the world ((allegations true),(allegations
false)) is represented by two matrix ballots.

> > Another time I had to pick two people out of 5 for a panel. I wanted the
> > panel to be balanced, so I voted "X for sure, Y if X wins, Z if X
> > doesn't".  Luckily, the voting population was small enough, and the
> > clerk had a good enough sense of humor to allow it.
> > 
> > Certainly it wasn't a question of unclear intent.
> 
> Bad clerk.  It's not about your intent being clear, it's about you getting
> access to information that other voters didn't.  Imagine if everyone
> tried to vote like that.  You wouldn't be able to determine winners
> because everyone would be waiting on others' results.

As long as you change "you wouldn't be able to determine" with "you
might likely be unable to determine" and change "everyeone would be
waiting on others' results" with "there might be multiple correct
results"
and then qualify it with "which might result in two separate winners"
I'll agree.

> > By the way, as an alternative for a lifetime jail sentence for Bush, a
> 
> Ah.  It wasn't clear to me, in your last message, who you intended to have
> go to jail.

Yeah, you people think Jerry Lewis is funny, too.