<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div class="m_-8808946313702345033moz-cite-prefix">
      <br>
      Michael Ossipoff wrote:<br>
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite"><span class="">Because I wanted people to vote, and
        because IRV is so popular and relatively well-known, I
        designated IRV as the count-rule.<br>
        <br></span><span class="">
        (I told people to rank only the candidates they approve of.)<br>
      </span></blockquote>
      <br>
      That is a bit odd, since IRV meets Later-no-Harm and so there's
      never any strategic point in truncating.<span class=""><br></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sure, that was a mis-statement: It was for the  _MDDA_ poll that I said to rank only the candidates the voter approves of. ...not for the IRV poll.<br><br></div><div>In the IRV poll, I and some others voted a complete ranking.<br><br></div><div>For the PoliticalForums poll on voting-systems, the alternatives were:<br><br></div><div>Plurality<br>Approval<br></div><div>Score<br></div><div>MDDA<br><br></div><div>I wanted to include a ranking-method. But I only wanted to include 1 ranking-method, because I didn't want to ask participants to read about more than 1 unfamiliar method or rank-count rule.<br><br></div><div>I chose MDDA because it (along with MDDAsc) is the best for elections, and is very briefly-defined--something that can make all the difference in poll-participation.<br><br></div><div>And, rather than define a different rank-count for the poll's designated count-rule, it seemed simpler to just designate MDDA (even though what's best for elections isn't necessarily best for a poll).<br><br></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div class="m_-8808946313702345033moz-cite-prefix"><span class="">
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">Of course, it's been pointed out that
        methods that elect the pair-winner, among the winners by 2
        different methods, tend to fail FBC.</blockquote>
      <br></span>
      And Mono-raise. It usually causes vulnerability (or greater
      vulnerability) to Push-over strategy.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For polls where offensive strategy seems more likely, I'll use:<br><br></div><div>Pairwise-Winner (MAM,  Smith,MMPO)<br><br></div><div>With the Smith set limiting what can be considered for winning, I don't think there's any need to let it otherwise change the MMPO count, by affecting the alternatives' maximum pairwise opposition..<br><br></div><div>...which could cause some unexpected, unintended results of one's ballot.<br><br></div><div>Maybe it would be more convenient to just call it:<br><br></div><div>P(MAM, Smith,MMPO)<br><br></div><div>By combining MAM's 1st-rate burial-deterrence with MMPO's automatic reliable chicken-dilemma defection prevention, that seems the best choice for counting rank-balloting polls, if the goal is to avoid successful offensive strategy.<br><br></div><div>But any reasons otherwise are welcome. Because I might sometimes want to use the best anti-strategy rank-count, I'm interested in any reasons why <br></div><div>P(MAM, Smith,MMPO) could be improved on.<br><br></div><div>Michael Ossipoff <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div class="m_-8808946313702345033moz-cite-prefix">
      <br>
      Chris Benham<div><div class="h5"><br>
      <br>
      <br>
      On 12/19/2016 6:49 AM, Michael Ossipoff wrote:<br>
    </div></div></div>
    <blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="h5">
      <div dir="ltr"><br>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 12:46 PM,
            Toby Pereira <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk" target="_blank">tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk</a>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px">
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3612" dir="ltr"><span id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3667">It
                      depends on what you mean by polls. If it's just an
                      opinion poll to see what the likely result will be
                      in an election (so something that isn't in any way
                      binding itself), it's about more than finding a
                      method that will produce a winner. </span></div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Yes. This isn't a political poll at all. It's an online
              poll on a non-political question, to find out what the CWs
              is, and which alternatives have majority approval.<br>
              <br>
               </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px">
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3612" dir="ltr"><span id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3667">You
                      want to be able to see the support of all the
                      candidates, and by having a method that's just set
                      up for a winner (your suggestion of the pairwise
                      winner from two different counting methods),
                      you're not going to achieve what you want to
                      achieve. For this sort of poll, you can use a
                      variety of different methods and publish all the
                      results</span></div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Yes, when the result won't be implemented, then there's
              no reason why it's necessary to name the count-method in
              advance, because the results by various methods could be
              given. If there's participation in that poll, I'll report
              results by MAM, Approval, &  probably Pairwise-Winner
              (MAM,  Smith,MMPO). <br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div> Most likely there won't be strategy, and the CWs will
              win as CWv.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>But sometimes, when there are only a few voters, other
              methods can be needed for tiebreaking.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>I recently did a poll on voting-systems, and MAM
              returned a tie between Approval & Score.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>The alternatives were:<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Approval<br>
            </div>
            <div>Score<br>
            </div>
            <div>Bucklin<br>
            </div>
            <div>MDDA<br>
            </div>
            <div>MDDAsc<br>
            </div>
            <div>IRV<br>
            </div>
            <div>Benham<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>But I noticed that Approval did better than Score in
              its pairwise comparisons.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>1. Approval pairbeat more alternatives than Score did.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>2. The sum of Approval's pairwise votes against the
              other alternatives was greater than that of Score.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>#1 means that Approval beats Score by Copeland.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>#2 means that Approval beats Score by a version of
              Borda.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>But #1 & #2 seem to compellingly indicate that
              Approval beats Score.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Of course there are good reasons to not announce
              Copeland or Borda as the count-rule. But, when there's a
              tie, they point to a winner in a meaningful way.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Somewhere else, at PoliticalForums, I'm conducting a
              presidential poll between Hillary, Jill, Donald, &
              Gary. <br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>I don't know the winner so far, because someone
              additional has just voted, and i haven't yet updated the
              count.<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Though PoliticalForums' Opinion-Polls forum supports
              Approval, with balloting, count, & count-display fully
              automated (voting is by click-bubble), I instead invited
              rankings. <br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Because I wanted people to vote, and because IRV is so
              popular and relatively well-known, I designated IRV as the
              count-rule.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>But I'll announce the winner by Approval,  Benham &
              by <br>
            </div>
            <div>Pairwise-Winner (MAM, Smith,MMPO) too.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>(I told people to rank only the candidates they approve
              of.)<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I conducted a voting-systems poll there too, and
              Approval is the winner there as well.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>I'm conducting two voting-system polls: One at
              PoliticalForums,and one at CIVS (Condorcet Internet Voting
              Service).<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>I emphasize that those two polls, at PoliticalForums
              & at CIVS, are to find out how _the general public_
              feels about voting-systems. Obviously the people here at
              EM, who are not representative of the general public on
              that subject, shouldn't vote in those
              general-public-opinion polls.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>But of course feel free to check out the results.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>As I said, Approval is the consistent winner, at both
              polls. Score is 2nd-best at CIVS. It seems to me that, at
              PoliticalForums, Score is tied with Plurality. No one but
              me approved MDDA.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px">
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3612" dir="ltr"><span id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3667">.</span></div>
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3691" dir="ltr"><span><br>
                    </span></div>
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3709" dir="ltr"><span id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3710">But
                      if you're just talking about elections that aren't
                      for public office, then things are different. Some
                      of these elections can be done online. </span></div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Yes, I've got several online polls going, on
              presidential candidates, voting-systems, &
              nonpolitical reform questions.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>In the CIVS presidential poll, with 72 votes in, Jill
              Stein is the CWv (with Bernie removed from the count).<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I invite people at EM to vote in the PoliticalForums
              presidential poll, if they want to. Go to PoliticalForums
              (You can find a link to it via google), and then go to its
              Opinion Polls forum. Among the polls there is my
              presidential poll.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>As I said, of course the voting-system polls are only
              for the general public, not for people who are familiar
              with voting-systems.<br>
              <br>
               </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div>
                <div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px">
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3709" dir="ltr"><span id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3710">And
                      for those that are likely to have an involved
                      electorate that are likely to be knowledgeable
                      about the system, I would suggest score voting but
                      with live totals published and changeable votes.
                      So people can enter their scores, but if the
                      current result suggested they will need to adopt a
                      more strategic approach, they can change their
                      vote accordingly. The only other thing I would add
                      is that the end time should probably be in some
                      way non-deterministic. Otherwise the live updates
                      are likely to be less effective. People might
                      withhold their vote until the last minute, or have
                      a completely false vote that they change at the
                      last minute. So you might have 24 hours guaranteed
                      (or however long is deemed appropriate), and then
                      it might randomly end with a half life of an hour
                      or something (which could be longer if the initial
                      guaranteed time is longer).</span></div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Yes, that would be a good reliable way to find the CWs.
              It could be feasible in a meeting-room, but, for most
              online polls, it isn't feasible. For one thing, it's
              difficult enough to get people to vote once. <br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Rankings is usually a good way to find out the CWs, and
              MAM always works fine at CIVS. But, at a forum where the
              people are very familiar with the matter being voted on,
              and highly committed to some alternative(s), I feel that
              it might be better to add Smith,MMPO's
              defection-proofness, via<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
              Pairwise-Winner (MAM,  Smith,MMPO)<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>or<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Pairwise-Winner (MAM,  Smith//MMPO)<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Any opinions on which would be better? <br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Mike<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px"> <br>
              <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3692" dir="ltr"><span><br>
                </span></div>
              <div class="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353qtdSeparateBR" id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3613"><br>
                <br>
              </div>
              <div class="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yahoo_quoted" id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3538" style="display:block">
                <blockquote id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3537" style="padding-left:5px;margin-top:5px;margin-left:5px;border-left-color:rgb(16,16,255);border-left-width:2px;border-left-style:solid">
                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3536" style="font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:13px">
                    <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3535" style="font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif;font-size:16px">
                      <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3534" dir="ltr"> <font id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3533" face="Arial" size="2">
                          <hr id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3614" size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold">From:</span></b>
                          Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</a>><br>
                          <b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b>
                          EM <<a href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com" target="_blank">election-methods@lists.electo<wbr>rama.com</a>>
                          <br>
                          <b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b>
                          Sunday, 18 December 2016, 6:05<br>
                          <b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b>
                          [EM] Voting-System Choice for Polls (Just one
                          more thing I want to say)<br>
                        </font> </div>
                      <div class="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353y_msg_container" id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3637">
                        <div>
                          <div class="m_-8808946313702345033h5"><br>
                            <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yiv7185354407">
                              <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3636" dir="ltr">
                                <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3635">
                                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3634">
                                    <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3633">
                                      <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3632">
                                        <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3631">
                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3630">
                                            <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3629">
                                              <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3628">
                                                <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3627">
                                                  <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3626">
                                                    <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3625">
                                                      <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3624">
                                                        <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3623">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3622">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3621">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3620">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3619">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3618">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3617">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3616">
                                                          <div id="m_-8808946313702345033m_-3807195920192830353yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1482082343788_3615">Before
                                                          quitting EM
                                                          & retiring
                                                          from
                                                          voting-systems,
                                                          there's one
                                                          more thing I'd
                                                          like to say:<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          What's the
                                                          best
                                                          voting-system
                                                          for polls?<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          Though FBC is
                                                          important for
                                                          official
                                                          political
                                                          elections, I
                                                          don't think it
                                                          serves a
                                                          purpose in
                                                          polls, where
                                                          the purpose is
                                                          to get sincere
                                                          rankings, and
                                                          hope that
                                                          people vote
                                                          sincere
                                                          rankings. In
                                                          polls, the
                                                          compulsion to
                                                          favorite-bury
                                                          is much less
                                                          likely.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          As I've said,
                                                          I haven't
                                                          noticed any
                                                          sign
                                                          (top-cycles
                                                          for 1st place)
                                                          of strategy in
                                                          polls.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          I suggest
                                                          that, for
                                                          sincere
                                                          electorates,
                                                          MAM is the
                                                          ideal best.
                                                          That means
                                                          it's best for
                                                          polls at the
                                                          Condorcet
                                                          Internet
                                                          Voting
                                                          Service, where
                                                          there's been
                                                          no sign of
                                                          strategy.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          But what if
                                                          you're doing a
                                                          poll among
                                                          people who are
                                                          highly
                                                          involved in
                                                          the subject
                                                          that you're
                                                          polling about,
                                                          and have
                                                          strong
                                                          committment to
                                                          some
                                                          alternatives?
                                                          Like, for
                                                          example,
                                                          suppose you're
                                                          pollng at EM
                                                          about
                                                          voting-systems?<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          Maybe some
                                                          members of the
                                                          electorate
                                                          will resort to
                                                          strategy.
                                                          Especially if
                                                          the electorate
                                                          are a
                                                          voting-system
                                                          mailing-lislt.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          So you can't
                                                          really be sure
                                                          that there'll
                                                          be no
                                                          chicken-dilemma
                                                          defection.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                          </div>
                                                          So maybe,
                                                          instead of
                                                          MAM,
                                                          Smith//MMPO
                                                          should be
                                                          used.<br>
                                                          <br>
                                                        </div>
                                                        It is
                                                        automatically
                                                        resistant to
                                                        chicken-dilemma
                                                        defection.<br>
                                                        <br>
                                                      </div>
                                                      But, for burial,
                                                      it isn't as good
                                                      as MAM. With MAM,
                                                      a candidate that
                                                      you, &
                                                      sufficiently-many
                                                      others, don't rank
                                                      can't beat the CWs
                                                      by burial.<br>
                                                      <br>
                                                    </div>
                                                    ...but it can in
                                                    MMPO, though there's
                                                    a lot of uncertainty
                                                    & risk in trying
                                                    burial in MMPO.<br>
                                                    <br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  Maybe Smith//MMPO's
                                                  reliable automatic
                                                  chicken-dilemma
                                                  protection is more
                                                  important, because
                                                  defection is easier
                                                  & less drastic a
                                                  strategy than burial.<br>
                                                  <br>
                                                </div>
                                                But maybe MAM's better
                                                burial protection is
                                                more important, because
                                                burial temptation &
                                                opportunity is a lot
                                                more common than a
                                                chicken-dilemma
                                                situation.<br>
                                                <br>
                                              </div>
                                              My suggestion: Use both.<br>
                                              <br>
                                            </div>
                                            Do the count by Smith//MMPO,
                                            & by MAM. Of the winners
                                            by those 2 methods, the
                                            final winner is the one that
                                            pairwise-beats the other.<br>
                                            <br>
                                          </div>
                                          That's a solid good solution,
                                          because:<br>
                                          <br>
                                        </div>
                                        In the chicken-dilemma example,
                                        and also in a burial example,
                                        the intended victim of the
                                        offensive strategy pairbeats the
                                        perps' candidate.<br>
                                        <br>
                                      </div>
                                      So, declaring, as winner, the one
                                      of those 2 winners that pairbeats
                                      the other is definitely the best
                                      solution, if MAM & Smith//MMPO
                                      are the best choices, each of
                                      which offers better protection in
                                      different ways.<br>
                                      <br>
                                    </div>
                                    Of course, it's been pointed out
                                    that methods that elect the
                                    pair-winner, among the winners by 2
                                    different methods, tend to fail FBC.<br>
                                    <br>
                                  </div>
                                  But FBC isn't needed in polls, where
                                  you want sincere ranking, not
                                  equal-top-ranking.<br>
                                  <br>
                                </div>
                                Michael Ossipoff<br>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                            <br>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                        <span>----<br>
                          Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em </a>for
                          list info<br>
                          <br>
                          <br>
                        </span></div>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="m_-8808946313702345033mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre>----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="m_-8808946313702345033moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="m_-8808946313702345033mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      </div></div><p color="#000000" align="left">No virus
        found in this message.<br>
        Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a><br>
        Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4739/13610 - Release
        Date: 12/18/16</p>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
  </div>

</blockquote></div><br></div></div>