On 26/09/2022 14:30, Richard Lung wrote: > > > It would be fair to say that the second part of my book, FAB STV: Four > Averages Binomial Single Transferable Vote, is an informal algorithm. > > > > On 16/09/2022 10:07, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote: >> On 9/16/22 05:05, Forest Simmons wrote: >>> As a mathematician I love formal analogies among apparently >>> disparate fields of inquiry ... the greater the apparent >>> disparities, the more interesting ... and the greater the potential >>> for cross fertilization! >> >> I still find it very hard to extract useful information from any of >> that. But then I have got Richard plonked for a reason :-) With my >> email client automatically ignoring his posts, I don't have to wrack >> my brain parsing them. >> >> I wonder if any of the early STV theoreticians focused very much on >> the count, because I see this sort of "algorithm-based approach" >> (where exactly how the algorithm works matters) both in Richard's >> posts and James Gilmour's program instruction view of ranked ballots. >> >> It's very different from my "ranked ballots are preferences, and >> criteria that are used to evaluate voting methods are entirely >> implementation agnostic" view -- which I have the impression is a >> later American perspective, although I couldn't say just how I've >> come to that impression. >> >> -km