<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <w:WordDocument>
  <w:View>Normal</w:View>
  <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
  <w:Compatibility>
   <w:BreakWrappedTables/>
   <w:SnapToGridInCell/>
   <w:ApplyBreakingRules/>
   <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
   <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
   <w:UseFELayout/>
  </w:Compatibility>
  <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
 </w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
 classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">Forest,</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">Experience
          of new election systems in the </span><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">UK</span><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold""> convinces me that
          two different votes in one election are a non-starter, for
          practical use, as
          well as in principle. A comparable situation existed with
          lobbying for the
          alternative vote top-up method, proposed by the supposedly
          “independent”
          Jenkins report. This had a covertly disreputable background,
          too lengthy to go
          into. But the outcome was that voters would be obliged to have
          both a
          preference vote and an x-vote. The governments own MPs would
          not support it. (Stuart
          Bell MP correctly predicted that “It will sink without a
          trace.”) But they
          asked subsequent official reports to consider it.</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">First
          up was the Kerley report for local Scottish government
          elections (recommending
          STV). They did not so much as sneeze at AV Top-Up, dismissing
          the very idea of
          an electoral system with two different kinds of votes.
          Apparently they had some
          strange idea that the voters matter in voting arrangements.</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">I
          predict that sooner or later, depending on whether reason or
          stubbornness
          prevail, that combining so-called approval votes with ranked
          choice voting
          would please no-one.</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">Under
          existing voting methods, tied to varieties of elimination
          counts, the
          elimination problem cannot be solved, and no definitive
          solution be possible.
          The only thing that can be done, under existing voting
          conventions, is to
          minimise the elimination problem. This is what the <span
            style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Hare system (in particular
        </span><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial
          Rounded MT Bold"">Cambridge</span><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold""> elections) does. </span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">The Hare system
          is known from a long history of practical test, giving ample
          time for any
          serious short-comings to reveal themselves.</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">This
          is not the case with untested approval voting cum RCV. (I
          would not even
          recommend my own method without proper preliminary testing.)
          That is why you did the right thng as a tester of mathematical
          proficiency.<br>
        </span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold""> </span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">On
          another subject, two women friends independently could not
          contain themselves
          from asking me: “Richard, don’t you ever read anything but
          serious books?”</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">When
          young and energetic, when I would look at any book that caught
          my interest, as
          if I would live forever, I filled volumes of diaries with
          notes on books read,
          that were an embarrassment to me most of my adult life. Since
          then it occurred
          to me to publish some of them. Just out is “Don’t You Ever
          Read Anything But Serious
          Books?”</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold""> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/1439523">https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/1439523</a></span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">Regards,</span></p>
      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
          style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
          Bold"">Richad Lung. <br>
        </span></p>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 26/08/2023 22:27, Forest Simmons
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANUDvfr8XeRpdng_m3dSUocgfy=JoVOsRs0hAt7qkkmGyS+COQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="auto">Richard,
        <div dir="auto"><br>
        </div>
        <div dir="auto">The department chair for my first teaching
          position was someone who had done his master's thesis on the
          efficacy of True/False tests for assessing student proficiency
          levels in mathematics.
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">The thesis that his work seemed to support was
            that a well designed T/F test with sufficiently many well
            chosen statements was just as reliable statistically .(as a
            predictor of success on standardized tests) as tests that
            gave students partial credit based on their written progress
            towards the correct answers of the respective "problems,"
            etc.</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">I never followed his advice to use them
            because I liked the student/teacher interaction over student
            work ... and it was easier for me to quickly come up with
            ten problems that would thoroughly test the students'
            proficiency on the material in question than to carefully
            construct a 400 statement T/F test with the same information
            potential.</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">But I can see the value of T/F and multiple
            choice tests for placing multitudes of students at the right
            level when their last math class was ten years ago, and no
            mathematician is available to interview them.</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">I would compare narrowing down a field of
            California governor wannabes to this rough placement level
            problem ... quick and dirty may be the right bang for the
            buck.</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">Best Wishes,</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">Forest</div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Aug 26, 2023, 4:39 AM
          Richard Lung <<a href="mailto:voting@ukscientists.com"
            moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">voting@ukscientists.com</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote"><br>
          Combining an approval vote with a preference vote is an
          example of a <br>
          makeshift combination method. It cannott be justified but it
          is <br>
          attempting to do something better, not amenable to existing
          methods.<br>
          <br>
          Approval voting is really classificatory voting. That is to
          say a <br>
          classical logic black or white, all or nothing, approval or
          rejection <br>
          vote. Yes, approval voting seems to be being tried as
          rejection or <br>
          elimination voting.<br>
          <br>
          This corresponds to the first thing HG Wells said about that
          other <br>
          classificatory vote, the x-vote: We no longer have elections
          in this <br>
          country (UK) we only have Rejections. (1912. The Labour
          Unrest).<br>
          <br>
          A preference vote covers opposites and everything in between.
          But it is <br>
          only used as an election. Preference voting can, however, also
          be used <br>
          in an exclusion count, including the whole range of dislikes
          and likes. <br>
          That is the system I invented.<br>
          <br>
          Regards,<br>
          <br>
          Richard Lung.<br>
          <br>
          ----<br>
          Election-Methods mailing list - see <a
            href="https://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
            target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://electorama.com/em</a>
          for list info<br>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>