Talk:Rob Richie: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 8:
:: That said, if Richie was involved in devising STAR, his page should probably have some references to that, as it came as quite a surprise to me and probably would to others too. [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 09:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
:: Aanund Hylland might be a better example of an "epsilon-activist". He proposed to Guyana's Constitutional Reform Commission, changes that would improve the country's proportional representation system.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20020724015115/http://landofsixpeoples.com/news/ns906232.htm</ref> But he's definitely not an activist in the sense that e.g. Warren Smith is. [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 10:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
:: After thinking about it a little more, a good threshold might be to consider the hypothetical that all the theorizing (or activism, respectively) was done by someone else. Would then the person be a notable activist (resp. theorist)? E.g. the part of Aanund Hylland who proposed PR changes to Guyana would probably not be listed in the activists category, were he a separate person. On the other hand, Warren would be listed as either theorist (e.g. optimal cardinal PR) or activist (CRV). Would a theorist-only Rob Richie be included in the voting theorist list? I don't know (because that he did any theory at all came as a surprise to me), but what do you think? [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 18:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
| |||