<html><head></head><body><div class="ydpa45b0096yahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><div></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Could you run the ballots through your method? It would be interesting to see.</div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Toby</div><div><br></div>
</div><div id="ydpcd39eff6yahoo_quoted_7164038387" class="ydpcd39eff6yahoo_quoted">
<div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
<div>
On Monday 20 May 2024 at 10:33:45 BST, Richard Lung <voting@ukscientists.com> wrote:
</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><div id="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380"><div>
<p><br clear="none">
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">I
noticed you used a points system to count the votes in your
ballot. This is
characteristic of non-proportional counts. In statistics, it is
the difference
between weighting in arithmetic progression (akin to Borda
method) and weighting
in arithmetic proportion (akin to Gregory method). The former is
only used when
a guess or estimate has to be made of the latter, in weighting
classes of data.
</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">Proportional
counting is more accurate. But mathematics has become
politicised by the
Machine, particularly in their ruthless routing of all but </span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">Cambridge</span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">
city elections. (A
similar political spirit has kept Kris Maharaj, an innocent man,
in a </span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">Florida</span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">
jail, since the early
nineteen eighties.)</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;"> Furthermore,
the use of which voting method, to count a ballot on voting
methods, has
already decided the best available option. But a conventional
count of
single-member systems cannot use the best available method.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">However
this does involve preference voting or ranked choice voting,
which is a rebuff
to single-preference votes or the stub vote, commonly called
“the vote.”Voting
for one-choice preferences, in a many-preference ballot, is as
much to say that
personal opinion over-rules the realities of the matter.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">This
is in flat contradiction to the HG Wells statement, that voting
methods, like
anything else, are capable of scientific (knowledgeable)
treatment. Voting
method is not a matter of opinion but a matter of demonstration.
It is
demonstrated that the vote is an ordinal vote, not least by the
denunciation of
“wasted votes,” and the urging of tactical/strategic voting.</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">Regards,</span></p>
<p class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:Rounded MT;">Richard
Lung.<br clear="none">
</span></p>
<p><br clear="none">
</p>
<p><br clear="none">
</p>
<div id="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqtfd22963" class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqt4881810723"><div class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380moz-cite-prefix">On 19/05/2024 17:40, Kristofer
Munsterhjelm wrote:<br clear="none">
</div>
</div><blockquote type="cite"><div id="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqtfd09554" class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqt4881810723">On
2024-05-18 21:20, Toby Pereira wrote:
<br clear="none">
<blockquote type="cite">Thanks for doing this Kristofer. If I
counted correctly Ranked Pairs beat Benham 5-4 with two ties, so
not a particularly significant result in that respect. But it
must have had at least two more approvals given that Minmax is
between them.
<br clear="none">
</blockquote>
<br clear="none">
That's a good point - I should post the Approval counts too :-)
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Here they are:
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Ranked Pairs (wv) 8
<br clear="none">
Minmax (wv) 7
<br clear="none">
Benham 6
<br clear="none">
STAR 6
<br clear="none">
Woodall 6
<br clear="none">
Approval 5
<br clear="none">
Approval with manual runoff 4
<br clear="none">
Margins-Sorted Approval 4
<br clear="none">
Schulze 4
<br clear="none">
Schwartz Woodall 3
<br clear="none">
Smith//Approval (explicit) 3
<br clear="none">
Smith//Approval (implicit) 3
<br clear="none">
Smith//Score 3
<br clear="none">
Baldwin 2
<br clear="none">
BTR-IRV (write-in) 2
<br clear="none">
Condorcet//Borda (Black) 2
<br clear="none">
Condorcet//Plurality (write-in) 2
<br clear="none">
Copeland//Borda (Ranked Robin) 2
<br clear="none">
Double Defeat, Hare 2
<br clear="none">
IRV 2
<br clear="none">
Majority Judgement 1
<br clear="none">
Margins-Sorted Minimum Losing Votes 1
<br clear="none">
Max Strength Transitive Beatpath 1
<br clear="none">
Raynaud 1
<br clear="none">
RCIPE 1
<br clear="none">
Score (write-in) 1
<br clear="none">
Smith//DAC 1
<br clear="none">
Borda (write-in) 0
<br clear="none">
Plurality 0
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
-km
</div><br clear="none">
----
<br clear="none">
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a shape="rect" href="https://electorama.com/em" class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380moz-txt-link-freetext" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://electorama.com/em</a> for
list info
<div id="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqtfd50549" class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqt4881810723"><br clear="none">
</div></blockquote><div id="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqtfd72849" class="ydpcd39eff6yiv2232379380yqt4881810723">
</div></div></div></div>
</div>
</div></body></html>