The House just voted to wipe out the FCC’s landmark Internet privacy protections

Re:The House just voted to wipe out the FCC’s landmark Inter... by ClayShentrup on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @12:00PM (#13987540)

Absolutely false. Strategic Plurality Voting means NOT voting for your favorite, e.g. a Green voting Democrat. With Approval Voting, that same voter's best strategy is to vote Democrat AND Green. THAT is why you'd vote for more than one candidate.

Later-no-harm is a silly "anti-criterion" that causes more harm than benefit. See explanation by a Princeton math PhD who co-founded the Center for Election Science.

http://scorevoting.net/LNH.html

He refutes similar FairVote FUD here.

http://scorevoting.net/RichieRV.html

FairVote lacks expertise and lies a lot.

https://sites.google.com/a/electology.org/www/fact-check

Here's a layman friendly talk I gave to the Colorado League of Women Voters a few years back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q_eMUGCU5U&t=487

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The House just voted to wipe out the FCC’s landmark Inter... by state_less on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @05:43PM (#13990879)

Thanks for posting all this info. In the youtube video, I liked the end where you talked about an objective satisfaction measure for these systems. For someone who wants to be able to provide more preference information at the ballot, and is not married to any particular method, it does make you wonder, why not directly use the objective measure for voting? You'd get a 1-1 correspondence. Wouldn't that maximize satisfaction and the voting method objective function?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The House just voted to wipe out the FCC’s landmark Inter... by ClayShentrup on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @08:26PM (#13991900)

You can't use it for voting because the voting system isn't omniscient.

http://scorevoting.net/WhyNoHumans

[ Parent | on HN ]