Comments on justice goals and penalties

I'd like to explain what I was saying before, on this subject. I didn't say it at all well, and so I'm posting this explanation instead.

In discussing and answering the criminal-justice question, I discussed violence in schools.

Emocracy ballot design

I have been dissatisfied with the design of the Emocracy ballot for a long time. I love this election method. It is similar both to Approval and to Score Voting. As such, it is very sound mathematically. It has an added option "I don't know" which explains the reason of some down vote (as in: "it's not that I don't like the candidate, but I don't know enough to decide either way").

ICT count-program pseudocode, 8.27.12

(Copied, with permission, from Democracy Chronicles)

ICT program-listing:

This pseudocode is for counting ICT, a rank-count which, I
claim, avoids the strategy problems otherwise distort voters sincere
expression of preferences--does so better than any other rank-count.

It meets FBC; is defection-resistant (maning that it avoids the
chicken dilemma); meets the Condorcet Criterion, if equal-top-ranking
and equal-bottom-ranking are counted consistent with the intent and
wishes of people voting in that way; and meets LNHe.

Vote for a Democrat if you want things to keep on staying the same

We've been taught that the Democrat and the Republican are the main candidates, and maybe (depending on how much a person has believed it) the only serious candidates.

We're told that the winner of our official public elections will always be a Democrat or a Republican. And guess what: It will be, if that's always whom we vote for :-) You've heard of a self-fulfilling prophesy?

Someone once said that we shouldn't expect a different result, when we keep on doing the same thing.

So yes, keep on voting for the Democrats or Republicans if you want things to keep on staying the same.

Getting a list of relevant issues, worded properly

Now that our polls with the candidates are running, it's about time to create a poll on the issues.

Have a look again at the list of 2008 issues:

Community manifesto

I have just added an area to the site where we'll be able to draft our community manifesto:

Anyone can create a new poll about any policy area that is of interest to them. Also, we can use this thread to discuss the broad topics we'd like to cover in our manifesto.

Obviously, the content of the manifesto will change as more and more people join in, participate and vote...

That'll be fun!

The 2012 Presidential Poll are posted!

I just posted the following polls:

[2012 Presidential Poll] Emocracy Voting
[2012 Presidential Poll] Plurality Voting
[2012 Presidential Poll] Approval Voting
[2012 Presidential Poll] Score Voting

but I still have a lot to do.

First of all, I need to add a common description for those 4 polls, a list of links to the candidates' wikipedia articles, as well as notes specific for each poll.

Emocracy: the middle rating

Michael wrote:

Augustin, I like Emocracy's 1/2 max middle rating, and I like the "I don't know" option, which I agree should be included in all of the ballotings.

Abuse by chair comment

In answer to the question about the abuse of power by the chair: Most likely the chair abused his power, but I haven't seen the video yet, and I'm not familiar with enough details to say.

ICT: Improved-Condorcet-Top election method...

As stated in my previous blog entry, I have started implementing a ranked-method ballot as Michael Ossipoff had proposed it. At first, I was thinking about implementing a simple Condorcet pair-wise matrix and then calculate the winner according to the ICT definition. However, the apparent simplicity of the ICT definition is deceptive and as such it fail even more the Paper and Pencil Criterion compared to a traditional Condorcet ballot.

Syndicate content