4,193
edits
User:RobLa/Burlington2009: Difference between revisions
Starting interview with rbj
(Stub page. Over time, this may become my personal position paper about Burlington 2009. TBD....) |
(Starting interview with rbj) |
||
Line 6:
The Condorcet criterion is not ''that'' hard to explain. In short, if a majority of voters prefer candidate A over candidate B (and express that preference on their ballots), then candidate A should beat candidate B.
As readers of Electowiki know, I'm Rob Lanphier, aka [[User:RobLa]]. I'm planning to iteratively publish an email interview with Robert Bristow-Johnson on this page. Robert is an electoral reform activist, and has been a longtime member of the [[Election-methods mailing list]] ("[[EM list]]"). Robert's first message in October 2009 ([http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com//2009-October/122858.html a response to Michael Rouse's "new method/request for voting paradoxes" thread]), and he's been continuously active since then. In fact, recently, he engaged in a conversation with [http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2020-April/thread.html#2523 a conversation with Kristofer Munsterhjelm about "Linear summability"] , which is what inspired me to start this interview.
The questions below will be from me, and answers will be from Robert.
=== Interview ===
==== Question #1: introduction ====
* Q: It's my understanding that you were living in Burlington back in 2009, when this election took place. Is that correct? If so, can you tell me what it was like?
* A: (________________)
| |||