[EM] Documentation of Methods - Wow look at those insights about drawbacks

[Alex Rollin]

Everyone on this list is so brilliant!  I am so glad that you guys are such
experts on all these methods, most of which I was totally unaware of before
listening in here.

That said, I did a tiny little bit of homework when I joined so I might be
more receptive to the lists blinding insights.  The bulk of this reading was
on Wikipedia.

Are the brilliant writers and experimenters here updating the documentation
on Wikipedia?

Here's the Condorcet entry that is drawing scrutiny!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method

The Schulz method page is pretty well done...I mean, it's got pictures, and
it's organized:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method

I was reading the recent thread "Drawbacks of Various Methods" and it seems
to me that it should be possible to amend each of the Wikipedia entries to
reflect these insights in a clear and collaborative fashion. Maybe?  And
then, perhaps a reading guide to each of the methods, and perhaps use cases
for different methods with clues about context?

I volunteer to read and digest, edit, and focus on guides (especially for
cooperative self-owned organizations.)

Alex
http://alexrollin.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20100526/9d24f211/attachment-0002.htm>