[EM] Re: Election-methods Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13

[Gervase Lam]

> From: Gervase Lam
> Subject: Re: [EM] Re: Election-methods Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13
> Date: Thursday 14 October 2004 22:41 pm

> > From: Matthew Dempsky
> > Subject: Re: [EM] Re: Election-methods Digest, Vol 4, Issue 13
> > Date: Thursday 14 October 2004 02:09 am
> >
> > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 20:45, Gervase Lam wrote:
> > > Kemeny can be basically described as follows:
> >
> > > [...example elided...]
> >
> > It seems similar in concept to finding the line of best fit, which
> > I'll note tries to minimize the sum of squared differences rather than
> > simply the sum of absolute differences.  Has that alternative been
> > considered?
>
> I don't think so, no.  However, the only way I can think of using this
> is possibly for multi-winner (e.g. a panel of candidates) election.  See
> <>. However, it talks about cardinal social utilities.  Condorcet
> methods don't have cardinal utilities as the input.

Whoops!  It might have been a good idea surf the web first so that I could 
put a link in between the '<' and '>', and then send the e-mail rather 
than sending the e-mail first...

<http://lists.electorama.com/htdig.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com/2001-January/004978.html>

Unfortunately, the formatting of the page is not very good.  Search for 
the word "isotone" on Yahoo Groups for this list might get something 
slightly better.

Thanks,
Gervase.