[EM] Au revoir,

Thu Feb 23 08:29:09 PST 2012

IMO, the best thing you could do to advance SODA is to support FairVote and
IRV3/AV3 as worthy of our approval, even if they're not our first-ranked
choice, make nice with Rob Richie and network with third party folks around
the world about your idea.

dlw

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>wrote:

> Cheers. It's been nice to have you around. I have been hard on you where
> we disagree; but in general, beyond the details of your theories, I think
> that your focus on what is actually achievable is a very healthy reminder.
>
> Jameson
>
>
> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>
>> I'm going to unsuscribe for a spell at least tomorrow night.
>> It's been fun, for the most part.
>>
>> I think my attempt at an intervention in the electoral debate here
>> probably reached the point of diminishing returns a bit back...
>> peace,
>> dlw
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:52 PM, <
>> election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Send Election-Methods mailing list submissions to
>>>        election-methods at lists.electorama.com
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>
>>> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>>>
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>        election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>        election-methods-owner at lists.electorama.com
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of Election-Methods digest..."
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>>   1. Does Range need an abstention/participation tally? (Jameson Quinn)
>>>   2. Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (David L Wetzell)
>>>   3. Oscar Voting (David L Wetzell)
>>>   4. Re: Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (Jameson Quinn)
>>>   5. Re: Oscar Voting (Jameson Quinn)
>>>   6. Re: Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis? (David L Wetzell)
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>
>>> To: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>,
>>> electionsciencefoundation <electionscience at googlegroups.com>
>>> Cc:
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:15:01 -0600
>>> Subject: [EM] Does Range need an abstention/participation tally?
>>> I'm working on sketching out data structures so that Helios Voting<https://vote.heliosvoting.org/>,
>>> an online, open-source, cryptographically-verifiable voting system, can use
>>> advanced voting procedures such as Range, Majority Judgment, and SODA.
>>> (Condorcet is a significantly harder problem but probably doable, and IRV
>>> is essentially impossible).
>>>
>>> My question is: for the Range voting structures, is it acceptable to
>>> just keep one tally (total score) for each candidate, or do you also need a
>>> tally of number of voters who rated/didn't rate a candidate? The latter
>>> would be used for average-based schemes; so this question is equivalent to
>>> asking, are such schemes important enough to be worth making the data
>>> structures more complex? Since I'm the one signing up for the programming
>>> work here, I'd appreciate it if answers that ask me to do more work have a
>>> reasoning and a strength (ie, "I'd kinda prefer it" versus "I think it is
>>> absolutely necessary").
>>>
>>> Jameson
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>> To: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
>>> Cc:
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:35:14 -0600
>>> Subject: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis?
>>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English
>>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of uber-mathematically
>>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic
>>> Economics movement.   <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of
>>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political
>>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics.
>>>
>>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best
>>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average
>>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to
>>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral
>>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike
>>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>.
>>>
>>>
>>> But I do believe that many more folks can learn to vote more rationally
>>> and that third parties and caucuses within major parties are the right
>>> groups for them to learn how to do that, but that's why I'm so enthusiastic
>>> about the strategic use of PR in "more local" elections, which ideally
>>> would by giving activists more exit threat would lead to the use of more
>>> caucuses like what is used by the Democrat-Farm-Labor party in MN.<http://dfl.org/about/caucuses-conventions>
>>>
>>> So I'm not saying don't do electoral analytics, but don't lose sight of
>>> the ambiguities involved in relating utopic, abstract models back to real
>>> life.
>>>
>>> dlw
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>> To: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
>>> Cc:
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:40:40 -0600
>>> Subject: [EM] Oscar Voting
>>> Steve Pond:
>>> http://www.thewrap.com/awards/column-post/oscar-voting-now-passions-got-nothing-do-it-35468?page=0,0
>>>
>>> The P of irv is on the rise, in addition to with the endorsement of
>>> Barack Obama as highlighted in Rob Richies editorial in the NYTimes, and
>>> we're not likely to change that in a way that similarly raises the P of
>>> *one *alternative.
>>> dlw
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>
>>> To: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:42:38 -0600
>>> Subject: Re: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis?
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English
>>>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of uber-mathematically
>>>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic
>>>> Economics movement.   <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of
>>>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political
>>>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics.
>>>>
>>>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best
>>>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average
>>>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to
>>>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral
>>>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike
>>>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I too consider my advocacy of SODA, and to a lesser extent MJ, as being
>>> strongly informed by a humanistic/cognitive view. It seems quite possible
>>> that one of us is wrong.
>>>
>>> Jameson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>
>>> To: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:47:42 -0600
>>> Subject: Re: [EM] Oscar Voting
>>> Um, the McCain/Obama endorsements are very old news – for instance, it's
>>> from before either MJ or SODA even existed. (I know in the latter case
>>> that's not saying much, nor am I claiming that Obama would be more likely
>>> to endorse SODA today, I'm just saying that there are two systems today
>>> that I consider reasonably well-explored and better than what existed
>>> previously, that didn't exist over in the early 2000s when Obama endorsed
>>> IRV.)
>>>
>>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> Steve Pond:
>>>> http://www.thewrap.com/awards/column-post/oscar-voting-now-passions-got-nothing-do-it-35468?page=0,0
>>>>
>>>> The P of irv is on the rise, in addition to with the endorsement of
>>>> Barack Obama as highlighted in Rob Richies editorial in the NYTimes, and
>>>> we're not likely to change that in a way that similarly raises the P of
>>>> *one *alternative.
>>>>  dlw
>>>>
>>>> ----
>>>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list
>>>> info
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>> To: Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:52:01 -0600
>>> Subject: Re: [EM] Post-Autistic Electoral Analysis?
>>> We could both be right, one in the short-run and the other in the
>>> long-run...
>>>
>>> dlw
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2012/2/22 David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> As you may know, at the beginning of this century, French and English
>>>>> economics graduate students challenged the dominance of uber-mathematically
>>>>> analytical approaches to Economics in what became the Post-Autistic
>>>>> Economics movement.   <http://www.paecon.net/HistoryPAE.htm>A lot of
>>>>> their critiques apply similarly to rational choice models in political
>>>>> science and might be worth pondering for electoral analytics.
>>>>>
>>>>> I myself consider my diffidence to jockeying for what's the best
>>>>> single-winner alternative to FPTP as blissfully ignoring how joe average
>>>>> voter(or habitual non-voter) is a creature of habit and won't respond to
>>>>> being given umpteen more choices in the way policy-wonkish electoral
>>>>> analysts would.This sort of behavioralist approach to voters is not unlike
>>>>> as shown by neurologists looking into the political brain<http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php>.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I too consider my advocacy of SODA, and to a lesser extent MJ, as being
>>>> strongly informed by a humanistic/cognitive view. It seems quite possible
>>>> that one of us is wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Jameson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Election-Methods mailing list
>>> Election-Methods at lists.electorama.com
>>> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list
>> info
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120223/f1b31ffa/attachment-0004.htm>