I will be attending MidAmeriCon II, the World Science Fiction Society's "Worldcon" in Kansas City, Missouri, from August 17-21, in order to help explain various proposals that have been put forward to fix the nomination system for the Hugo awards to deal with the "rabid puppy" situation (a group of strategic voters who have gained disproportionate representation among the finalists for the last two years; google it for more info). I have been offered time for a panel discussion on the future of democracy, elections, and voting. Does anybody on these lists know anyone besides me who would be good for such a panel? Anybody who's interested in these issues, whether it's voting rights, abstract election systems, voting technology, moderation or reputation systems in social networks, or anything related, would be great. A certain amount of disagreement makes for a more interesting panel, so I'm not looking for conformity and I'd love people with less of a focus on abstract voting theory. Any suggestions welcome; I'd be happy to do the follow-up myself.

To Jameson Quinn, The best available answer to problem of bloc voting is proportional representation of mostprefered individual literary choices by the single transferable vote. Make it easy on yourself by downloading the Meek method STV computer count. I think it's freely available from the Electoral Reform Society. If not they could tell you where. (The New Zealand Electoral Commission use this method for some official elections.) Meek STV will proportionally represent the greatest preferences of any camp or anti-camp, whether SJWs or Rabid Puppies or neither. I suggest nominations for each category as an STV five member constituency, electing the first five preferences in each category. Voters allowed as many prefernces as they like. A second-round could elect a winner and runner-up to an STV two member constituency. The problem with IRV, as an exclusion count, was summed up by Winston Churchill: the worst votes for the worst candidates. By the way, I solved this problem with my innovation of Binomial STV, which uses a rational exclusion count, avoiding premature exclusion, as well as a rational election count. It would be useful in polarised elections, like the Hugos, because it enables voters to exclude candidates or options, they least like, as well as elect those they most like. In response to an EM group member, I web-paged an example of how it works. From Richard Lung. On 09/06/2016 17:17, Jameson Quinn wrote: > I will be attending MidAmeriCon II, the World Science Fiction > Society's "Worldcon" in Kansas City, Missouri, from August 17-21, in > order to help explain various proposals that have been put forward to > fix the nomination system for the Hugo awards to deal with the "rabid > puppy" situation (a group of strategic voters who have gained > disproportionate representation among the finalists for the last two > years; google it for more info). I have been offered time for a panel > discussion on the future of democracy, elections, and voting. Does > anybody on these lists know anyone besides me who would be good for > such a panel? Anybody who's interested in these issues, whether it's > voting rights, abstract election systems, voting technology, > moderation or reputation systems in social networks, or anything > related, would be great. A certain amount of disagreement makes for a > more interesting panel, so I'm not looking for conformity and I'd love > people with less of a focus on abstract voting theory. Any suggestions > welcome; I'd be happy to do the follow-up myself. > > > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info -- Richard Lung. E-books (mostly available free or reader-sets-price) http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/colverse.html Includes the series of books on: Democracy Science (starting with electoral reform and research); Commentaries (literature and liberty; science and democracy); Collected verse (in five books).

How is this coming along? On Thursday, 9 June 2016 17:17:22 UTC+1, Jameson Quinn wrote: > > I will be attending MidAmeriCon II, the World Science Fiction Society's > "Worldcon" in Kansas City, Missouri, from August 17-21, in order to help > explain various proposals that have been put forward to fix the nomination > system for the Hugo awards to deal with the "rabid puppy" situation (a > group of strategic voters who have gained disproportionate representation > among the finalists for the last two years; google it for more info). I > have been offered time for a panel discussion on the future of democracy, > elections, and voting. Does anybody on these lists know anyone besides me > who would be good for such a panel? Anybody who's interested in these > issues, whether it's voting rights, abstract election systems, voting > technology, moderation or reputation systems in social networks, or > anything related, would be great. A certain amount of disagreement makes > for a more interesting panel, so I'm not looking for conformity and I'd > love people with less of a focus on abstract voting theory. Any suggestions > welcome; I'd be happy to do the follow-up myself. >