Talk:Pairwise counting: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 115:
:: You added "However, it requires a post-processing stage to convert the Condorcet matrix into the more familiar form before usage by Condorcet methods." to a part of the page discussing how negative counting required less markings than the regular approach. I think you properly understand how negative counting works, but I'd just like to reiterate that this part of the procedure doesn't add any work for the vote-counters, and thus it doesn't work against the claim that negative counting requires less marks, or the general idea of it being less work. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 21:55, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
::: Yes, that's true. I simply meant to show that you don't get quite as much for free as it might seem like you're getting, particularly if the counts are computerized, because you have to add some numbers to correct the non-marked candidate counts at some point, however you do the precinct counts. [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 12:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
| |||