<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>I'm not sure I exactly followed that. Jameson's option 2 is to look at the nominated slates and see which is best. You could also still use one of the other methods to find a possible winner and then compare it with the best nominated slate (if they are different). Is that anything like what you're saying?<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Juho Laatu <juho4880@yahoo.co.uk><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> election-methods Methods <election-methods@electorama.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thu, 7 July, 2011 22:51:45<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [EM] Toby Pereira, PR voting methods<BR></FONT><BR>
<DIV>I'd like to add one more option. It is actually close to option 2 below. Specify separately how to compare two slates (which one is better) and what optimization algorithm will be used when trying to find the best slate. The optimization algorithm may change from one election to the next, but the comparison rule stays the same. Also in this method algorithmic improvements can improve the method.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Juho</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On 7.7.2011, at 23.17, Jameson Quinn wrote:</DIV><BR class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Assume you have some way to score the "goodness" of a slate of representatives. You want to find the best possible such slate, but you don't have the computational resources to score all possible slates. The options are:
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>1. Add candidates one at a time. Advantages: deterministic and simple. Disadvantages: not very optimal.</DIV>
<DIV>2. Use the best nominated slate. Advantages: takes advantage of any future algorithmic improvements without needing new rules. Disadvantage: could provide an edge to those with more computational resources; requires time for people to nominate slates.</DIV>
<DIV>3. Add candidates N at a time, with N being as big as your computer can handle.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>All of the above have been discussed. But there's another possibility, which is probably better than 3:</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>4. "One out and two in" - at each step, find the best slate which differs from the prior step by removing M candidates and then adding M+N. This is almost certainly computationally feasible for N=M=1.</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>2011/7/7 Toby Pereira <SPAN dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk" rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk">tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk</A>></SPAN><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>On my web page where I describe my Proportional Range Voting System (<A href="http://www.tobypereira.co.uk/voting.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.tobypereira.co.uk/voting.html</A>), I have suggested that it should be possible for a computer to sort out the result in a reasonable amount of time. Of course, this may not actually be the case considering the number of possible winning sets of candidates that you might get in some elections.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So as with other systems, a sequential system could be used. Calculate who would be the winning candidate in a single-winner election and then find the best combination of two winners, given that the single winner is elected. Then with these two elected, find the best combination of three and so on. Then if this takes it too far the other way and makes it too "easy" for a computer to calculate you can select candidates in blocks of two or three. I think I've seen Forest Simmons and others discussing this hybrid version of sequential/non-sequential systems.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think this would still be a very different system to Reweighted Range Voting, especially consdering that it elects single winners in a different way.<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 13px">
<DIV class=im><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Warren Smith <<A href="mailto:warren.wds@gmail.com" rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:warren.wds@gmail.com">warren.wds@gmail.com</A>><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> election-methods <<A href="mailto:election-methods@electorama.com" rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:election-methods@electorama.com">election-methods@electorama.com</A>><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sun, 3 July, 2011 20:25:35<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [EM] Toby Pereira, PR voting methods<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=h5>Two are RRV<BR> <A href="http://rangevoting.org/RRV.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://rangevoting.org/RRV.html</A><BR>and asset voting<BR> <A href="http://rangevoting.org/Asset.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://rangevoting.org/Asset.html</A><BR><BR>A recent real-world election that used RRV is described here:<BR> June2011RealWorldRRVvotes.txt<BR><BR>In T.P.'s essay it'd be nice if he subdivided it into smaller chunks<BR>with subheading titles, and summarized whatever he concluded<BR>concisely.<BR><BR>-- <BR>Warren D. Smith<BR><A href="http://rangevoting.org/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://RangeVoting.org</A> <-- add your endorsement (by clicking<BR>"endorse" as 1st step)<BR>and<BR><A href="http://math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html</A><BR>----<BR>Election-Methods mailing list - see <A href="http://electorama.com/em"
rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://electorama.com/em</A> for list info<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>----<BR>Election-Methods mailing list - see <A href="http://electorama.com/em" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://electorama.com/em</A> for list info<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV>----<BR>Election-Methods mailing list - see <A href="http://electorama.com/em" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://electorama.com/em</A> for list info<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>