<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<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]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">“still keeping some degree of local representation”</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">“Local representation” by National Members is the
mantra of Safe-seat Man, feeding the populus, reformers and
anti-reformers alike, with their mothers milk, in which the most
elementary logic plays no part.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Local representation is the prerogative of local
government. National representation is the prerogative of
national government, and not local representation.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">The outcome of this cross-wired politics is that
British local government is moribund, and members of the
national parliament grossly over-burdened with relatively petty
local problems; “glorified social workers,” far beyond their
numbers to efficiently cope. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">While, there is no time for the issues of national
politics, which are corralled by the national executive, and in
which the public has virtually no say, and is not expected to
have. Hence the Hailsham term for 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""> government as “an elective dictatorship.”</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Moreover the supposedly “local” representation of
the single-member system is a euphemism for what actually takes
place. In most cases, and as a matter of principle, these
unstable constituencies do not serve any particular locality.
Their boundaries are periodically smashed to give Members of
Parliament an approximately equal workload and equal powers of
patronage over their constituents. Neither democracy nor
community is the purpose of the single-member system, but
members monopolies on representation. The house of commons or
communities should accurately be called the house of monopolies,
departing from its historic role, late in the nineteenth
century.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">The assumption that the single-member constituency
is the most local is the fallacy of scale. It is an extension of
the confused idea that the only democracy is personal democracy,
on the scale of the ancient Greek polis or city state.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">In other words, democracy is not a function of
representation by the fewest seats per constituency possible;
one sole representative, democracy is, as Hare and Mill said it
was, a function of many seats per constituency equally
representative (by quota). This applies as much to the most
local representation as to the most universal representation.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Regards, <br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Richard Lung.<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""> </span></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/11/2023 16:25, Toby Pereira
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1347859608.2357077.1699547110253@mail.yahoo.com">
<div class="ydp941989a1yahoo-style-wrap">
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">On non-deterministic methods,
they can give potentially a better level of proportional
representation than deterministic methods, while still keeping
some degree of local representation. If you have
constituencies with 5 or 6 representatives and use e.g. STV,
then parties/ideologies with 10% of the support nationally
would likely keep missing out and win far less than 10% of the
seats. Non-deterministic methods can mean that on average
things balance out.</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">If you use the simple random
ballot method, things would still be pretty bad. With just one
representative per constituency, quite a lot of people are
likely to be represented only by a lunatic fringe candidate.
But with 5 or 6 winning candidates, popular candidates will
still generally win through, and there will be a balance of
representation in each constituency.</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Proportional methods can also
get quite complex, but this can be massively reduced with a
non-deterministic method. For example, COWPEA Lottery uses
approval voting. To elect candidates you simply do this:</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span>Start with a list of
all currently-unelected candidates. Pick a ballot at random
and remove from the list all candidates not approved on this
ballot. Pick another ballot at random, and continue with
this process until one candidate is left. Elect this
candidate. If the number of candidates ever goes from >1
to 0 in one go, ignore that ballot and continue. If any tie
cannot be broken, then elect the tied candidates with equal
probability.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span>It also has very good
criterion compliance. If you accept non-determinism and
ballots that aren't just ordinal, then probably the best of
any known candidate-based proportional method. </span><a
href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/COWPEA" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://electowiki.org/wiki/COWPEA</a></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Toby</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yahoo_quoted_9991638099"
class="ydpcdaeb516yahoo_quoted">
<div>
<div> On Wednesday, 8 November 2023 at 18:18:24 GMT, Richard
Lung <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:voting@ukscientists.com"><voting@ukscientists.com></a>
wrote: </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789">
<div>
<p><br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Why
has theorem Arrow gained so much traction over the
years?</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>The
short answer, history is written by the victors.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>The
history answer takes some explaining but is evident
enough.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>New
York</span><span>, for instance, had a Personal
Representation society, by the late nineteenth
century. In fact the organised campaign writings, of
its early successes, over a century old, have been
bought-up, and are still subject to publishers pay
walls, of little if any commercial value and
contrary to the public interest.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>By
the 1937 edition of Proportional Representation. The
key to democracy. Clarence Hoag and George Hallett
were introducing a single transferable vote to the
boroughs of </span><span>New York</span><span>.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>These
two campaigning great men, both mathematicians in
their day job, did not get a mention in Wikipedia,
when I last looked.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>As a
result of battering-ram referendums with the money
and publicity on their side, The Machine virtually
abolished the key to democracy.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Massachusetts</span><span>
legislature forbad other cities than </span><span>Cambridge</span><span>
to use their electoral reform. There are several
home-rule bills but they are bogged down in state
committee.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Kenneth
Arrow stepped in, in the nineteen fifties, to
effectively finish the job of The Machine. He took
the Kurt Godel Incompleteness theorem an extreme
step further by advertising an “Impossibility
theorem,” which he himself, cited in Scientific
American, belatedly admitted it did not amount to.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>In
other words, he by-passed, nearly a century of
election method study, stemming from Thomas Hare and
John Stuart Mill. That tradition continues and so
does the naïve ignorance of it.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>As a
Scottish STV programmer commented, theorem Arrow
does not even apply to proportional representation,
but merely to bare majority elections.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Any
theorem is only as good as its assumptions, and
those of the Impossibility theorem neglect the
possibility that statistical methods might be more
accurate than deterministic ones, as is indeed the
case in physics.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Regards,
<br>
</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span>Richatrd
Lung.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span><br>
</span></p>
<p class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789MsoNormal"><span><br>
</span></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-cite-prefix">On
07/11/2023 13:35, Toby Pereira wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpd48923f3yahoo-style-wrap">
<div dir="ltr">As is often the case, I think the
importance of Arrow's Theorem is overstated in
that article. Arrow's Theorem essentially says
"With a few reasonable background assumptions, no
ranked-ballot method passes Independence of
Irrelevant Alternatives." But this was already
known for centuries from the Condorcet Paradox. I
don't really know why it's gained so much traction
over the years, as it was nothing like the
paradigm shift people credit it as.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Toby</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yahoo_quoted_9697965469"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yahoo_quoted">
<div>
<div> On Tuesday, 7 November 2023 at 04:29:31 GMT,
Forest Simmons <a shape="rect"
href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><forest.simmons21@gmail.com></a>
wrote: </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204">
<div>
<div>Rob,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for clearing up a lot of the
confusion... and for putting the current
status in perspective.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I like the comparison of the
"impossibilities of voting" with the
impossibilities of faster than light
travel, etc. The 2nd law of
thermodynamics is especially relevant...
because as Prigogene showed in the 70's,
the impossibility of decreasing entropy
in closed systems still allows for local
pockets of possibility ... that make
life possible .... until the "heat
death" of our island space-time big bang
remnant ... while miriads of new
"inflationary bubbles" appear from
random virtual quantum fluctuations.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We used to "know" that the event
horizon was a boundary of no return ....
nut now evaporation of black holes
through quantum tunneling is taken for
granted.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the early 1800's Gauss proved the
impossibility of trisecting an
arbitrarily given angle .... inside the
rules of classical geometric ruler and
compass constructions.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But it turns out that (as any first
year topology student can show) any
angle can be transformed into
atrisectable one by an arbitrarily small
perturbation.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm fact, once you learn the binary
point expansion of 1/3 ..., you can get
within a relative error tolerance of
1/2^n precision with n bisections...
bisections being the first constructions
you learn in geometty.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Pockets of possibility like these
.... adequate "For All Practical
Purposes" pervade mathematics ...
including the mathematics of voting
systems.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sometimes you have to discover new
tools not included in the classical tool
kit. In the case of angle trisections,
if you are allowed to make a few marks
on the ruler... hen the general ruler
and compass trisection suddenly resolves
itself.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Forest</div>
</div>
<br>
<div
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_quote">
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204yqt91197"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204yqt7468526250">
<div dir="ltr"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_attr">On
Sun, Nov 5, 2023, 11:34 PM Rob
Lanphier <<a shape="rect"
href="mailto:roblan@gmail.com"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">roblan@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi folks,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I just wrote a letter to the
editor(s) of Scientific American,
which I've included below. My
letter was in a response to the
following article that was
recently published on their
website:<br>
</div>
<div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-how-math-could-design-the-perfect-electoral-system/"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-how-math-could-design-the-perfect-electoral-system/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Y'all may have other thoughts
on the article.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>Rob<br>
<div
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_attr">----------
Forwarded message ---------<br>
From: <b
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_sendername">Rob
Lanphier</b> <span><<a
shape="rect"
href="mailto:roblan@gmail.com"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">roblan@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
Date: Sun, Nov 5, 2023 at
11:22 PM<br>
Subject: Regarding using math
to create a "Perfect Electoral
System"<br>
To: Scientific American
Editors <<a shape="rect"
href="mailto:editors@sciam.com"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">editors@sciam.com</a>><br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>To whom it may concern:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I appreciate your article
"Could Math Design the
Perfect Electoral System?",
since I agree that math is
important for understanding
electoral reform, and
there's a lot of good
information and great
diagrams in your article:</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-how-math-could-design-the-perfect-electoral-system/"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/see-how-math-could-design-the-perfect-electoral-system/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There's some things that
the article gets wrong, but
the good news is that the
article title and its
relation to <span>Betteridge</span><span>'s
law. This law states </span>"Any
headline that ends in a
question mark can be
answered by the word <i>'</i>no<i>'</i>."
The bad news: the URL slug
("see-how-math-could-design-the-perfect-electoral-system")
implies the answer is
"yes". The answer is "no";
Kenneth Arrow and Allan
Gibbard proved there is no
perfect electoral system
(using math).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I appreciate that your
article highlights the
mayoral election in
Burlington, Vermont in
2009. That is an important
election for all voters
considering FairVote's
favorite single-winner
system ("instant-runoff
voting" or rather
"ranked-choice voting, as
they now call it). When I
volunteered with FairVote in
the late 1990s, I remember
when they introduced the
term "instant-runoff
voting". I thought the name
was fine. After Burlington
2009, it would seem that
FairVote has abandoned the
name. Regardless, anyone
considering instant-runoff
needs to consider
Burlington's experience.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sadly, your article
describes "cardinal methods"
in a confusing manner. It
erroneously equates
cardinal's counterpart
("ordinal voting") with
"ranked-choice voting".
Intuitively, all "ordinal
methods" should be called
"ranked choice voting", but
during this century, the
term has been popularized by
FairVote and the city of San
Francisco to refer to a
specific method formerly
referred to as
"instant-runoff voting".
These days, when Americans
speak of "RCV", they're
generally referring to the
system known on English
Wikipedia as "IRV" (or
"Instant-runoff voting"):</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting</a><br>
</div>
<br>
<div>There have been many
methods that use ranked
ballots, including the
methods developed by Nicolas
de Condorcet
and Jean-Charles de Borda in
the 1780s and the 1790s. I'm
grateful that the Marquis de
Condorcet's work is featured
so prominently in your
article. Condorcet's work
was brilliant, and I'm sure
he would have become more
prominent if he hadn't died
in a French prison in the
1790s. Many single-winner
methods that strictly comply
with the "Condorcet winner
criterion" are probably as
close to "perfect" as any
system (from a mathematical
perspective).<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Most methods that pass
the "Condorcet winner
criterion" typically use
ranked ballots (and thus are
"ordinal"), but it's
important to note that
almost all "ordinal" methods
can use cardinal ballots.
Instant-runoff voting
doesn't work very well with
cardinal ballots (because
tied scores cannot be
allowed), but most other
ordinal systems work
perfectly well with tied
ratings or rankings. Even
though passing the Condorcet
winner criterion is very
important, there are many
methods that come very, very
close in reasonable
simulations. I would
strongly recommend that you
contact Dr. Ka-Ping Yee, who
is famous in electoral
reform circles for "Yee
diagrams":</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Yee_diagram"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://electowiki.org/wiki/Yee_diagram</a></div>
<div>(a direct link to Yee's
2005 paper: <a shape="rect"
href="http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/</a>
)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Note that "approval
voting" and "Condorcet"
provide pretty much the same
results in Yee's 2005
paper. "Instant-runoff
voting" seems a little crazy
in Yee's simulations.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Though Arrow and Gibbard
disproved "perfection", I
prefer to think of Arrow's
and Gibbard's work as
defining the physics of
election methods. To
explain what I mean,
consider the physics of
personal transportation. It
is impossible to design the
PERFECT vehicle (that is
spacious, and comfortable,
travels faster than the
speed of light, fits in
anyone's garage or personal
handbag). Newton and
Einstein more-or-less proved
it. However, those esteemed
scientists' work didn't
cause us to stop working on
improvements in personal
transportation. Buggy whips
are now (more or less)
recognized as obsolete, as
is Ford's "Model T".<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now that Arrow and
Gibbard have helped us
understand the physics of
election methods, we can
hopefully start pursuing
alternatives to the buggy
whip (or rather,
alternatives to "choose-one"
voting systems, often
referred to as "first past
the post" systems). <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This gets me to the
statement from your article
that gets under my skin the
most::</div>
<blockquote
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yiv0954465204gmail_quote">
<div>This is called cardinal
voting, or range voting,
and although it’s no
panacea and has its own
shortcomings, it
circumvents the
limitations imposed by
Arrow’s impossibility
theorem, which only
applies to ranked choice
voting. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
<div>People who study election
methods refer to "cardinal
voting" as a <i>category</i>
of voting methods, of which
"range voting" is just one
(which is called "score
voting" on English
Wikipedia):</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Score_voting"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Score_voting</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The conflation of "ranked
choice voting" with all
ordinal voting methods is
also highly problematic
(though I don't entirely
blame you for this). As I
stated earlier, there are
many methods that can use
ranked ballots. While this
article may have been
helpful for those of us that
prefer ranking methods that
are not "instant-runoff
voting" back when FairVote
switched to "ranked-choice
voting" in the early 2010s.
Note that before the fiasco
in Burlington in 2009,
FairVote pretty consistently
preferred "instant runoff
voting":</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://web.archive.org/web/20091111061523/http://www.fairvote.org/"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://web.archive.org/web/20091111061523/http://www.fairvote.org/</a></div>
<br>
<div>I appreciate that you're
trying to explain this
insanely complicated topic
to your readers. When I
edit English Wikipedia
(which I've done for over
twenty years), I would love
to be able to cite
Scientific American on this
topic. However, I'm not yet
sure I'd feel good about
citing this article.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rob Lanphier</div>
<div>Founder of
election-methods mailing
list and <a shape="rect"
href="http://electowiki.org"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">electowiki.org</a><br>
</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://robla.net"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://robla.net</a></div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/User:RobLa"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://electowiki.org/wiki/User:RobLa</a></div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RobLa"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RobLa</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>p.s. back in the late
1990s, I wrote an article
for a small tech journal
called "The Perl Journal".
It's out of print, but I've
reproduced my 1996 article
about election methods which
I think holds up pretty
well:</div>
<div><a shape="rect"
href="https://robla.net/1996/TPJ"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://robla.net/1996/TPJ</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a
shape="rect"
href="https://electorama.com/em"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext"
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a>
for list info
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd11320"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd65030"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd07488"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd07600"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd35524"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581">
</div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd40820"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581">
<div
id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yqt56102"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789ydpafe61227yqt7468526250">----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a
shape="rect"
href="https://electorama.com/em"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a>
for list info<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd43619"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd89855"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd22750"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> <br>
<fieldset
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-quote-pre">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a shape="rect" href="https://electorama.com/em" class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789moz-txt-link-freetext moz-txt-link-freetext" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div id="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqtfd88014"
class="ydpcdaeb516yiv0491022789yqt5150919581"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>