election-methods@mailman.electorama.com

Technical discussion of election methods

View all threads

robla's weekly hangout: 2pm-4pm PDT/PST on Tuesdays

RL
Rob Lanphier
Thu, Nov 11, 2021 10:45 PM

Hi Richard,

First, let's talk about how you prefer to be addressed.  Would you
prefer "Hi Richard", or "Hi Dr. Fobes" or some old-fashioned gendered
formal thing?  I will address you as "Mr. VoteFair Guy" if you prefer
that.

As for me, I like "Hi Rob" as a greeting, and I've grown quite fond of
"Hi robla" over the years.  "Hello Mr. Lanphier" sounds stern and
foreboding, but if you're pissed off at me, that's not a bad way to
start a conversation.

More inline...

On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 1:47 PM Richard Lung voting@ukscientists.com wrote:

Supposition about the supporters of the Hare system is not science. I can easily
substantiate the independent inventors of proportional representation, Thomas
Hare and Carl Andrae. Their method the proportional count of the preference
vote is based on the foundation of our civilisation, in the sciences and the arts,
namely order and proportion.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I have a metaphor to explain
STV that I hope resonates.  Pretend that the goal is to divide up a
pumpkin pie among five people.  One "scientific" way to do it is to
put the pie in the center of a large centrifuge, and put five
equally-spaced vials within the perimeter of the centrifuge.  Securely
attach funnels to the mouths of the vials (that are large enough to
catch the flying pie bits).  Then securely attach the pie tin to the
rotating axis, and turn it on for a few minutes.

With a proper centrifuge and funnel rig, it would be possible to
divide the pie up five ways evenly.  It seems that there are better
ways of dividing up pie, but the centrifuge/funnel method would likely
ensure five equal vials of pie.  My problem with using a centrifuge is
that it literally forces the pie to the edges of the centrifuge.  It's
also my problem with Hare's method.

Enough about centrifuged pies though; more below....

To be more specific, it conforms to the work of S. S. Stevens, in Science, in the
1940s, on the scales of measurement, including the ordinal scale and the ratio
scale, conspicuous by their absence in so many dud voting methods, not entirely
absented from this mailing list.

I'm assuming you're referring to this paper:
https://web.archive.org/web/20131124150916/https://marces.org/EDMS623/Stevens%20SS%20(1946)%20On%20the%20Theory%20of%20Scales%20of%20Measurement.pdf

...written by this guy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Smith_Stevens

I haven't read it.  I'm assuming you're suggesting everyone reading
this mailing list should.  Could you give the "tl;dr" version of the
paper?

Rob

Hi Richard, First, let's talk about how you prefer to be addressed. Would you prefer "Hi Richard", or "Hi Dr. Fobes" or some old-fashioned gendered formal thing? I will address you as "Mr. VoteFair Guy" if you prefer that. As for me, I like "Hi Rob" as a greeting, and I've grown quite fond of "Hi robla" over the years. "Hello Mr. Lanphier" sounds stern and foreboding, but if you're pissed off at me, that's not a bad way to start a conversation. More inline... On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 1:47 PM Richard Lung <voting@ukscientists.com> wrote: > Supposition about the supporters of the Hare system is not science. I can easily > substantiate the independent inventors of proportional representation, Thomas > Hare and Carl Andrae. Their method the proportional count of the preference > vote is based on the foundation of our civilisation, in the sciences and the arts, > namely order and proportion. I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I have a metaphor to explain STV that I hope resonates. Pretend that the goal is to divide up a pumpkin pie among five people. One "scientific" way to do it is to put the pie in the center of a large centrifuge, and put five equally-spaced vials within the perimeter of the centrifuge. Securely attach funnels to the mouths of the vials (that are large enough to catch the flying pie bits). Then securely attach the pie tin to the rotating axis, and turn it on for a few minutes. With a proper centrifuge and funnel rig, it would be possible to divide the pie up five ways evenly. It seems that there are better ways of dividing up pie, but the centrifuge/funnel method would likely ensure five equal vials of pie. My problem with using a centrifuge is that it literally forces the pie to the edges of the centrifuge. It's also my problem with Hare's method. Enough about centrifuged pies though; more below.... > To be more specific, it conforms to the work of S. S. Stevens, in Science, in the > 1940s, on the scales of measurement, including the ordinal scale and the ratio > scale, conspicuous by their absence in so many dud voting methods, not entirely > absented from this mailing list. I'm assuming you're referring to this paper: https://web.archive.org/web/20131124150916/https://marces.org/EDMS623/Stevens%20SS%20(1946)%20On%20the%20Theory%20of%20Scales%20of%20Measurement.pdf ...written by this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Smith_Stevens I haven't read it. I'm assuming you're suggesting everyone reading this mailing list should. Could you give the "tl;dr" version of the paper? Rob
RT
Richard, the VoteFair guy
Thu, Nov 11, 2021 11:24 PM

Rob ~

Wrong Richard ....

That was Richard Lung -- LUNG (not Fobes) -- who addressed you as "Mr Rob".

Richard Fobes
The VoteFair guy

On 11/11/2021 2:45 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote:

Hi Richard,

First, let's talk about how you prefer to be addressed.  Would you
prefer "Hi Richard", or "Hi Dr. Fobes" or some old-fashioned gendered
formal thing?  I will address you as "Mr. VoteFair Guy" if you prefer
that.

As for me, I like "Hi Rob" as a greeting, and I've grown quite fond of
"Hi robla" over the years.  "Hello Mr. Lanphier" sounds stern and
foreboding, but if you're pissed off at me, that's not a bad way to
start a conversation.

Rob ~ Wrong Richard .... That was Richard Lung -- LUNG (not Fobes) -- who addressed you as "Mr Rob". Richard Fobes The VoteFair guy On 11/11/2021 2:45 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote: > Hi Richard, > > First, let's talk about how you prefer to be addressed. Would you > prefer "Hi Richard", or "Hi Dr. Fobes" or some old-fashioned gendered > formal thing? I will address you as "Mr. VoteFair Guy" if you prefer > that. > > As for me, I like "Hi Rob" as a greeting, and I've grown quite fond of > "Hi robla" over the years. "Hello Mr. Lanphier" sounds stern and > foreboding, but if you're pissed off at me, that's not a bad way to > start a conversation.
RL
Rob Lanphier
Fri, Nov 12, 2021 4:00 AM

On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 3:24 PM Richard, the VoteFair guy
electionmethods@votefair.org wrote:

Wrong Richard ....

That was Richard Lung -- LUNG (not Fobes) -- who addressed you as "Mr Rob".

Hi Richard (Fobes, a.k.a. "the VoteFair guy"),

I'm SO sorry!  I'm worried that this may not be the first time I've
mixed the two of you up.  I'll be more careful when replying to either
of you in the future.

While we're at it, though Richard Fobes (the VoteFair guy), how do you
prefer to be addressed?

Rob
p.s. Richard Fobes website: http://www.votefair.org/
p.p.s. The last known location of Richard Lung's website:
http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/ .  It is archived here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210421075817/http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/

On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 3:24 PM Richard, the VoteFair guy <electionmethods@votefair.org> wrote: > Wrong Richard .... > > That was Richard Lung -- LUNG (not Fobes) -- who addressed you as "Mr Rob". Hi Richard (Fobes, a.k.a. "the VoteFair guy"), I'm SO sorry! I'm worried that this may not be the first time I've mixed the two of you up. I'll be more careful when replying to either of you in the future. While we're at it, though Richard Fobes (the VoteFair guy), how do you prefer to be addressed? Rob p.s. Richard Fobes website: http://www.votefair.org/ p.p.s. The last known location of Richard Lung's website: http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/ . It is archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/20210421075817/http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/
RL
Rob Lanphier
Tue, Dec 7, 2021 10:16 PM

Hi everyone,

RobLa's "Tuesday at 2" is still happening.  As I write this, it is
about 20 minutes after 2pm PST here in San Francisco.  If you'd like
to join the conversation, just follow this link:
https://whereby.com/robla

Rob

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:12 PM Rob Lanphier roblan@gmail.com wrote:

Hi folks,

I've started having a weekly video hangout every Tuesday from 2pm PDT
until 4pm PDT (i.e. right now!).  After the United States switches off
Standard Time (this upcoming weekend) then it will switch to every
Tuesday from 2pm PST until 4pm PST (it's just the PDT->PST change
that's coming up).  I'll send the full details about the video
technology I'm using (Whereby) to anyone who sends me a private email,
though it's not that hard to figure out how to crash the party.

I hope to see at least one of all y'all before the end of the year.

Rob

Hi everyone, RobLa's "Tuesday at 2" is still happening. As I write this, it is about 20 minutes after 2pm PST here in San Francisco. If you'd like to join the conversation, just follow this link: https://whereby.com/robla Rob On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:12 PM Rob Lanphier <roblan@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I've started having a weekly video hangout every Tuesday from 2pm PDT > until 4pm PDT (i.e. right now!). After the United States switches off > Standard Time (this upcoming weekend) then it will switch to every > Tuesday from 2pm PST until 4pm PST (it's just the PDT->PST change > that's coming up). I'll send the full details about the video > technology I'm using (Whereby) to anyone who sends me a private email, > though it's not that hard to figure out how to crash the party. > > I hope to see at least one of all y'all before the end of the year. > > Rob