2004-June Archives by Author

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...

Starting: Tue Jun 1 09:39:02 2004
Ending: Wed Jun 30 21:48:07 2004
Messages: 282

• [EM] Electronic voting security   =?iso-8859-1?q?Anthony=20Duff?=
• [EM] Re: Definition of fully voting one candidate over another   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] equal "opportunity" vs "power"   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Approval with equalling votes   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B (errors)   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] A summable Approval variant for solid majorities   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: A summable Approval variant for solid majorities   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Margins   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Condorcet-like Ratings-based System   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Election Calculator additions: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Election Calculator additions: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   =?iso-8859-1?q?Kevin=20Venzke?=
• [EM] Re: Runoff vs. IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Runoff vs IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: completing Condorcet using ratings information   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: margins axiom   Chris Benham
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: completing Condorcet using ratings information   Chris Benham
• [EM] Re: completing Condorcet using ratings information   Chris Benham
• [EM] margins and winning votes   Fan de Condorcet
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Dgamble997@aol.com
• [EM] MAM definitions   Steve Eppley
• [EM] margins axiom   Steve Eppley
• [EM] Re: margins axiom   Steve Eppley
• [EM] Re: margins axiom   Steve Eppley
• [EM] Wikipedia   James Gilmour
• [EM] Wikipedia   James Gilmour
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   James Gilmour
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   James Gilmour
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   James Gilmour
• [EM] Wikipedia   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Eric Gorr
• [EM] margins and winning votes   Eric Gorr
• [EM] Wikipedia   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: Wikipedia   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Wikipedia / ballot taxonomy   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Wikipedia   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] trying to start an on-list Jargon Dictionary   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Jargon Dictionary   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] maximum affirmed majorities   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: maximum affirmed majorities   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: false claim about MMC examples?   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: value of FBC and WDSC compliance   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: majority loser criterion   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] IRV vs. approval: dominant mutual third   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: majority loser criterion   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Every MMC example can just as easily be an IRV WDSC & FBC failurle examp   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: ER-IRV(whole)   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Chris: Approval vs IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] a similar method to weighted pairwise   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: completing Condorcet using ratings information   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] a similar method to weighted pairwise   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] weighted pairwise method: clarification   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] possible amendment to weighted pairwise proposal   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: completing Condorcet using ratings information   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] weighted pairwise method and compressing-ranks method   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] no opinion option   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] example correction from weighted pairwise and compressing-ranks posting   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] current version of weighted pairwise proposal   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] margins and winning votes   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] margins and winning votes   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] margins axiom   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] similar alternative to ratings-rankings ballot   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] versions of weighted pairwise   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Inclusion Voting - true approval   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Inclusion Voting   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Kerry and Nader   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Kerry and Nader   James Green-Armytage
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] Who are we?   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] non-deterministic methods for better strategy proofness   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] PLEASE consider: More non-deterministic methods   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] PLEASE consider: More non-deterministic methods   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] Re: Proposal   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] Re: Proposal   Jobst Heitzig
• [EM] Nader could designate same electors as Kerry   John Hicks
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Enacting in Law   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Re: equal rankings IRV   Bart Ingles
• [EM] Cumulative Vote equivalence to Plurality   Ken Johnson
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Wikipedia   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Who are we?   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] non-deterministic methods for better strategy proofness   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Re: Chris: Approval vs IRV   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Re: A>B, B>A, A=B   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Ballot initiative in Colorado   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Margins   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Margins   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Margins   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Margins   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Margins   Dave Ketchum
• [EM] Another way to describe Approval Voting   Jan Kok
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Gervase Lam
• [EM] Re: Electronic voting security   Gervase Lam
• [EM] Another SciAm voting mention   Rob LeGrand
• [EM] Re: Proposal   Rob LeGrand
• [EM] Ballot initiative in Colorado   Mike
• [EM] Re: Definition of fully voting one candidate over another   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Definition of fully voting one candidate over another   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Pseudo-electoral reform for California   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Runoff vs IRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Wikipedia   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Approval is not one person one vote   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Approval vs IRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Approval, but not IRV, always has unreversed Nash equilibria   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] MAM definitions   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Chris: Approval vs IRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Every MMC example can just as easily be an IRV WDSC & FBC failurle example   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] IRVers guarantee that maybe IRV won't fail.   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] ERIRV vs Approval   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] AERLO & ATLO for wv & Bucklin   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Majority Loser & Mutual 3rd Dominant Set Criterion. Equalling votes.   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Middle voters in 3-candidate election should vote only for their favorite.   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] More about Approval vs ERIRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Chris: Approval vs IRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Equalling-vote problems   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Approval errs toward middle. IRV errs toward extremes. Which is worse?   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Approval is Set Voting   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Nader could designate same electors as Kerry   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] ERIRV   MIKE OSSIPOFF
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Brian Olson
• [EM] Cumulative Vote equivalence to Plurality   Brian Olson
• [EM] Wikipedia   Brian Olson
• [EM] Wikipedia   Brian Olson
• [EM] Wikipedia   Brian Olson
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Brian Olson
• [EM] Re: Approval is not one person one vote   Brian Olson
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Brian Olson
• [EM] Election Calculator additions: equal rankings IRV   Brian Olson
• [EM] Election Calculator additions: equal rankings IRV   Brian Olson
• [EM] Re: Margins   Brian Olson
• [EM] Election Calculator additions: equal rankings IRV   Brian Olson
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Wikipedia   Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Nader could designate same electors as Kerry   Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Fwd: Pseudo-election reform in California   Dr.Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Re: maximum affirmed majorities   Dr.Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Dr.Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Dr.Ernie Prabhakar
• [EM] query re random method rank voting   RLSuter@aol.com
• [EM] Election categories   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] Approval is not "one person, one vote"   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] Chris: Approval vs IRV   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   Stephane Rouillon
• [EM] Wikipedia   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Wikipedia   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Single winner elections - Ballot types   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Tom Ruen
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Inclusion Voting - true approval   Tom Ruen
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   Markus Schulze
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   Markus Schulze
• [EM] Wikipedia   Markus Schulze
• [EM] current version of weighted pairwise proposal   Markus Schulze
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Markus Schulze
• [EM] equal rankings IRV   Markus Schulze
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Curt Siffert
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   Curt Siffert
• [EM] one person, one vote   Curt Siffert
• [EM] Cumulative Vote equivalence to Plurality   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Cumulative Vote equivalence to Plurality   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Top Three Condorcet   Forest Simmons
• [EM] PLEASE consider: More non-deterministic methods   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Proposal   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Proposal   Forest Simmons
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   Alex Small
• [EM] Re: Election-methods digest, Vol 1 #688 - 6 msgs   Alex Small
• [EM] trying to start an on-list Jargon Dictionary   Rob Speer
• [EM] Wikipedia   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Approval is not "one person, one vote"   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Wikipedia   Adam Tarr
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   Adam Tarr
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Adam Tarr
• [EM] approval vs. IRV: majority loser criterion   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   Adam Tarr
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Chris: Approval vs IRV   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Single Winner Systems categorization   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Kerry and Nader   Adam Tarr
• [EM] Pseudo-election reform in California   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] equal "opportunity" vs "power"   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] Updated web tool   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] a similar method to weighted pairwise   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] Enacting in Law   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] Condorcet-like Ratings-based System   bql@bolson.org
• [EM] Plurality is not a "yes/no voting system"   tomruen@juno.com
• [EM] Runoff vs IRV   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] IMHO, IRV superior to approval   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Re: IMHO, IRV superior to Approval   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Complex Preferences [Was: A>B, B>A, A=B]   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Complex Preferences   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] PLEASE consider: More non-deterministic methods   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Proposal   wclark@xoom.org
• [EM] Proposal   wclark@xoom.org

Last message date: Wed Jun 30 21:48:07 2004
Archived on: Wed Jun 30 20:48:08 2004

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...