<div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 21:47 Chris Benham <<a href="mailto:cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au">cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><u></u>
<div>
<p><br>
</p><blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">But don’t you want the STAR initiative next
month in Eugene, Oregon to pass?</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Definitely not. It is a very bad method, worse than Approval. </div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But better than count-fraud.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Of course I prefer Approval to STAR.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="auto"><br>
<br>
Hare is much better, and I gather there is some prospect that
Oregon can get that.</div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">At first I thought that might be a good thing, until I found out that the IRVist-organizations aren’t willing to come-clean & choose honesty.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Never buy a fraudulently-promoted product.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Did you hear that, Oregon & Nevada?</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="auto"><br>
<br>
<a href="https://fairvoteaction.org/ranked-choice-voting-could-be-coming-to-oregon/" target="_blank">https://fairvoteaction.org/ranked-choice-voting-could-be-coming-to-oregon/</a><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">…&, unlike the dishonesty & fraud of
FairVote, the EqualVote people have been honest.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
If the authors of their online propaganda are honest, then they
are quite stupid and/or misguided.</div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">They’re younger. FairVote is just outright dishonest.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="auto"><p></p></div><div><p><br>
</p>
<p>Chris<br>
<br>
</p>
<div>On 7/04/2024 5:22 am, Michael Ossipoff
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="auto">I didn’t answer your other question:</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<p dir="auto"><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p dir="auto"> And surely anyone here on this list
can nominate any method they choose (and have it
accepted/acknowledged) regardless of whether or
not the method's supporters want it nominated.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Yes, I have to agree that that sounds fair. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">But don’t you want the STAR initiative next
month in Eugene, Oregon to pass?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">We’re mostly Condorcetists here. STAR would
finish below everything but IRV & Plurality. It would
finish 3rd-from-bottom.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">The IRVists would call attention to that in
Eugene.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I don’t think you want that any more than I
do.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">EqualVote has worked long & hard on that
initiative.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">…&, unlike the dishonesty & fraud of
FairVote, the EqualVote people have been honest.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Of course anyone can nominate anything,
because the poll would lose democratic-legitimacy & if I
tried to say otherwise. But surely you don’t want to do that
to them. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Anyway, wouldn’t it be a step up, to
demonstrate in Eugene that there are better things than
Plurality?</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p><br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<div>On 6/04/2024 10:46 pm, Michael Ossipoff wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">This is to acknowledge the
nominations of Smith//Default-Approval,
Smith//Explicit-Approval, Margins-Sorted
Approval, & Smith//DAC.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I’d say include STAR, because
that’s what its advocates would want. …or would
they? Its enactment is going to be voted-on in
Eugene next month, & what if it finishes low
here? That would be worse for the Eugene
initiative than not including it.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Of course showing voters about
methods’ popularity here is my stated-purpose
for the poll, & the fact that it’s about to
be voted on for enactment would seem to suggest
including it. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">But the advocates of STAR have
been working hard, completely in good faith,
& STAR is a lot better than IRV. Those are
two good reasons to let EqualVote decide on
STAR’s inclusion in the poll.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I’ll ask the EqualVote group,
& go by what they say.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">(In fact STAR, while more
complicated than Approval, has nothing like the
amount of count-complexity of Condorcet, or the
consequent amount of count-insecurity &
count-fraud vulnerability. I personally don’t
propose STAR, because I regard it as an
inbetween compromise between Approval & the
ranked-methods, & I want the absolutely
minimal. (I only propose Condorcet to
jurisdictions where people insist on rankings.)
…but, by my simplicity-standard, STAR scores
high, even though I don’t propose it.)</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">So the nominations list so-far is
now (listed in order of nomination):</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Approval</div>
<div dir="auto">RP(wv)</div>
<div dir="auto">Schulze</div>
<div dir="auto">IRV</div>
<div dir="auto">Plurality</div>
<div dir="auto">MinMax(wv)</div>
<div dir="auto">Black</div>
<div dir="auto">Baldwin </div>
<div dir="auto">Benham</div>
<div dir="auto">Woodall</div>
<div dir="auto">Schwartz-Woodall</div>
<div dir="auto">Smith//Approval (of all ranked)</div>
<div dir="auto">Smith//Approval (of what is
specified)</div>
<div dir="auto">Margin-Sorted Approval</div>
<div dir="auto">Smith//DAC</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Apr
6, 2024 at 04:03 Chris Benham <<a href="mailto:cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au" target="_blank">cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">
<div>
<p><br>
I would like to nominate several
methods.<br>
<br>
Smith//Approval (Ranking):<br>
<br>
Voters rank from the top only those
candidates they "approve", equal-ranking
allowed,<br>
the most approved member of the voted
Smith set wins.<br>
<br>
Smith//Approval (specified cutoff):<br>
<br>
Voters rank from the top however many
candidates they wish and can also
specify an approval<br>
cutoff/threshold. Default approval is
only for candidates ranked below no
others (i.e. ranked top<br>
or equal-top).<br>
The most approved member of the Smith
set wins.<br>
<br>
Margins Sorted Approval (specified
cutoff):<br>
<br>
Voters rank from the top however many
candidates they wish and can also
specify an approval<br>
cutoff/threshold. Default approval is
only for candidates ranked below no
others (i.e. ranked top<br>
or equal-top).<br>
<br>
A Forrest Simmons invention. Candidates
are listed in approval score order and
if any adjacent pairs<br>
are pairwise out of order then this is
corrected by flipping the out-of-order
pair with the smallest<br>
margin. If there is a tie for this we
flip the less approved pair. Repeat
until there are no adjacent pairs<br>
of candidates that are pairwise out of
order, then elect the highest-ordered
candidate.<br>
<br>
Smith//:DAC<br>
<br>
Voters rank from the top however many
candidates they wish, equal-ranking
allowed.<br>
Eliminate candidates not in the Smith
set and then apply Woodall's Descending
Acquiescing Coalitions method.<br>
<br>
There is a method I hate that is
apparently contending in the real world:
"STAR". Given the stated purpose of <br>
this poll, is there a case for including
it?<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"><b style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Michael
Ossipoff</b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline!important;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></span><a href="mailto:election-methods%40lists.electorama.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BEM%5D%20Poll%20on%20voting-systems%2C%0A%20to%20inform%20voters%20in%20upcoming%20enactment-elections&In-Reply-To=%3CCAOKDY5BkSGJkX%3D7zWXBr2t1SBNVMNj96wm-T8ubvr_wGM5h51w%40mail.gmail.com%3E" title="[EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming enactment-elections" style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal" target="_blank">email9648742
at gmail.com</a><br style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">
<i style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Wed
Apr 3 22:13:28 PDT 2024</i><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline!important;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0)"></span>
<p style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br>
</p>
<hr style="font-family:"Times New Roman";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<pre style="white-space:pre-wrap;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;font-family:monospace;color:rgb(0,0,0)">EM used to do a lot of polls, but now never does. So I wouldn’t propose
one, if it weren’t for the fact that, this year, the voters of at least two
states are going to vote on whether to enact a certain voting-system.
It seems to me—tell me if I’m wrong—that those people have a right to know
how people familiar with voting-systems feel about the relative merits of
some voting-systems.
So, though I claim that polls are valuable for demonstrating the experience
of using the voting systems, & how they work, & what they’ll do—& are
therefore useful & worthwhile for their own sake—this poll that I now
propose isn’t a poll for its own sake.
It is, as I said, proposed for the important practical purpose of letting
the voters in the upcoming enactment-elections know how we feel about the
relative merits of some voting-systems, including the one that they’re
about to vote on the enactment of.
The voting-method for the poll:
It seems to me that Schulze is the most popular ranked voting-system, among
the people at EM.
…& it seems to me that the last time we voted on EM’s collective favorite
voting-system, Approval won.
Those seem the top-two, in EM popularity.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div>