Yet Another Possible Quorum Rule

[Frank Martinez]

Hello,

    Like other RV/SV Advocates, I have spent many an hour pondering possible "quorum rule" alternatives. Each one I have seen so far has its good points and potential bad points. I would like to humbly propose yet another alternative, if it has not yet been discussed, Laplace's rule of succession: http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/6358/weight-a-rating-system-to-favor-items-rated-highly-by-more-people-over-items-rat

    Thoughts? Emotions? Visceral reactions? Yea? Nay? No opinion? Not sure?

My appreciation in advance.

[Dale Sheldon-Hess]

If I'm reading this right (and I haven't finished my morning caffeine) then he spent an awful lot of math to get to the same answer as "soft quorum (aka "better quorum") of 4 zeroes", based on there being 4 allowed scores. I'm not sure the number of allowed scores is the right parameter to base that on (better, I would think, to base it on the expected number of voters.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Center for Election Science" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to electionscien...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Frank]

On Tuesday, January 7, 2014, Dale Sheldon-Hess wrote:

If I'm reading this right (and I haven't finished my morning caffeine) then he spent an awful lot of math to get to the same answer as "soft quorum (aka "better quorum") of 4 zeroes", based on there being 4 allowed scores. I'm not sure the number of allowed scores is the right parameter to base that on (better, I would think, to base it on the expected number of voters.)

The expected number of Voters may or may not be better. Is there a mathematical reason to choose either Voters or potential scores?

 

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Frank Martinez <frankdm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

    Like other RV/SV Advocates, I have spent many an hour pondering possible "quorum rule" alternatives. Each one I have seen so far has its good points and potential bad points. I would like to humbly propose yet another alternative, if it has not yet been discussed, Laplace's rule of succession: http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/6358/weight-a-rating-system-to-favor-items-rated-highly-by-more-people-over-items-rat

    Thoughts? Emotions? Visceral reactions? Yea? Nay? No opinion? Not sure?

My appreciation in advance.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Center for Election Science" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to electionscien...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Center for Election Science" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to electionscien...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
P.S.: I prefer to be reached on BitMessage at BM-2D8txNiU7b84d2tgqvJQdgBog6A69oDAx6

[Dale Sheldon-Hess]

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Frank <frankdm...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, January 7, 2014, Dale Sheldon-Hess wrote:

If I'm reading this right (and I haven't finished my morning caffeine) then he spent an awful lot of math to get to the same answer as "soft quorum (aka "better quorum") of 4 zeroes", based on there being 4 allowed scores. I'm not sure the number of allowed scores is the right parameter to base that on (better, I would think, to base it on the expected number of voters.)

The expected number of Voters may or may not be better. Is there a mathematical reason to choose either Voters or potential scores?

 

If you're worried about the "madman is elected by his small number of fanatics" scenario, then yeah, I'd say you'd want your soft quorum based on the number of voters; specifically, the largest size a group of fanatics could get to without alerting the rest of the electorate of their mad plan. I feel, if approval voting were in use across a moderately sized state, that the number should be higher than 2.

--

Dale