User talk:Psephomancy: Difference between revisions
→Set theoretic article a good idea?
No edit summary |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 126:
Given how often we discuss set-theoretic concepts (not just things like the Smith set, but even most criteria; for example, if you have 5 candidates and a Pareto preference for the first over the second, then in some sense the "Pareto-compliant set of candidates" is all candidates except the 2nd), should we have a dedicated article for it? Reading things like Schulze's article on the Schulze method might be a lot easier if we have a voting theory-specific guide for understanding set theory. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 19:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
: That's probably fine. What would it say that's different from [[w:Set theory|Set theory]]? — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 19:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
| |||