Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [FSP] Freestaters everywhere in NH

Expand Messages
  • Jason Sorens
    This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more gameable than any form of Condorcet voting. :)
    Message 1 of 28 , Jan 29, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
      form of Condorcet voting. :)

      On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:

      > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
      >>
      >> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
      > to some method of Concorcet, . . .
      >
      > I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
      > superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
      > interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
      > choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
      > intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
      > on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
      > increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
      > theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
      > would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
      > elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
      > compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
      > ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
      > etc.
      >
      > Blay
      >
      >
      > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
      >>
      >> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only about 900
      >> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but there are
      >> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been elected
      >> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
      >> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
      >> elected
      >> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
      >> And the
      >> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal inside the
      >> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
      >> allow
      >> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee while
      >> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to explain to
      >> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws, (5) and
      >> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening right now
      >> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
      >>
      >> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
      >> 30-year
      >> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it, and the
      >> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet. If you
      >> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the fact is,
      >> "it's
      >> beginning to happen."
      >>
      >> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
      >> also got
      >> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state senate, and
      >> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
      >> Platform,
      >> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
      >> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch with and
      >> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
      >>
      >> Timothy Condon, Esq.
      >> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
      >> Cell 813-453-2379
      >> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
      >> Tampa, Florida 33606
      >> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
      >> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
      >>
      >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
      >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
      >>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
      >>>
      >>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
      >>>
      >>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5 years now)
      >>>
      >>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
      >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com><gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>>
      >>> wrote:
      >>>
      >>> Tim Condon wrote:
      >>>>
      >>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
      >>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
      >>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
      >>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people migrate
      >>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
      >>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the volume
      >>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
      >>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
      >>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
      >> tell you
      >>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the state
      >>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
      >> libertarian-conservative
      >>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
      >> other
      >>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
      >> Democratic
      >>>> Gov. John Lynch,
      >>>
      >>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to be the
      >>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
      >>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters of NH,
      >>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
      >>> Democratic governor.
      >>>
      >>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no closer to
      >>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH primary
      >>> than he did in most states.
      >>>
      >>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a population to
      >>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move there.
      >>>
      >>> Gary
      >>>
      >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>
      >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Stephen
      There s a nice graph here showing how various voting systems fare when people are voting sincerely or tactically: http://www.electology.org/tactical-voting
      Message 2 of 28 , Jan 29, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        There's a nice graph here showing how various voting systems fare when people are voting sincerely or tactically:
        http://www.electology.org/tactical-voting

        --- In freestateproject@yahoogroups.com, Jason Sorens <jsorens@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
        > form of Condorcet voting. :)
        >
        > On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
        >
        > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
        > >>
        > >> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
        > > to some method of Concorcet, . . .
        > >
        > > I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
        > > superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
        > > interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
        > > choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
        > > intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
        > > on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
        > > increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
        > > theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
        > > would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
        > > elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
        > > compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
        > > ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
        > > etc.
        > >
        > > Blay
      • Tim Condon
        Hi Jason. I ve got to say, I don t think this discussion to be (overly) off-topic. Why? Because all types of things are going to be thought about and
        Message 3 of 28 , Jan 29, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Jason. I've got to say, I don't think this discussion to be (overly)
          off-topic. Why? Because all types of things are going to be thought about
          and considered in the Free State about government and its form, functions,
          and mechanics that have never been "allowed" to be discussed and advanced
          virtually anywhere in the past. Usually because an anointed political
          cognoscenti has declared certain subjects and threads of thought to be "out
          of bounds." Changing the lesser-of-two-evils voting system to some form of
          ranking system is one of them. But in New Hampshire, *nothing* is out of
          bounds that will help bring our state government into the 21st century and
          make it less intrusive, less overbearing, less dangerous, more efficient,
          less expensive, and more hospitable to liberty and individualism. Thus,
          talking about IRV, Condorcet, and other "ranking methods" of voting should
          be thought of as well within the imprimatur of the Free State Project and
          its participants. ---Tim Condon




          On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens <jsorens@...> wrote:

          >
          >
          >
          > This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
          > form of Condorcet voting. :)
          >
          > On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
          >
          > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
          > >>
          > >> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
          > > to some method of Concorcet, . . .
          > >
          > > I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
          > > superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
          > > interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
          > > choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
          > > intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
          > > on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
          > > increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
          > > theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
          > > would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
          > > elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
          > > compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
          > > ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
          > > etc.
          > >
          > > Blay
          > >
          > >
          > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
          > >>
          > >> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only about 900
          > >> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but there are
          > >> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
          > elected
          > >> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
          > >> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
          > >> elected
          > >> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
          > >> And the
          > >> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal inside
          > the
          > >> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
          > >> allow
          > >> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
          > while
          > >> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to explain
          > to
          > >> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws, (5) and
          > >> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening right
          > now
          > >> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
          > >>
          > >> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
          > >> 30-year
          > >> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it, and the
          > >> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet. If you
          > >> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the fact is,
          > >> "it's
          > >> beginning to happen."
          > >>
          > >> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
          > >> also got
          > >> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state senate,
          > and
          > >> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
          > >> Platform,
          > >> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
          > >> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch with and
          > >> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
          > >>
          > >> Timothy Condon, Esq.
          > >> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
          > >> Cell 813-453-2379
          > >> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
          > >> Tampa, Florida 33606
          > >> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
          > >> Email: tim@... <tim%40timcondon.net> <mailto:
          > tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
          >
          > >>
          > >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...<dreepa%40yahoo.com>
          > >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>> wrote:
          > >>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
          > >>>
          > >>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
          > >>>
          > >>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5 years now)
          > >>>
          > >>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...<gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
          > >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>><gsnyder15%
          > 40yahoo.com>>
          >
          > >>> wrote:
          > >>>
          > >>> Tim Condon wrote:
          > >>>>
          > >>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
          > >>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
          > >>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
          > >>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people migrate
          > >>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
          > >>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the volume
          > >>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
          > >>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
          > >>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
          > >> tell you
          > >>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the state
          > >>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
          > >> libertarian-conservative
          > >>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
          > >> other
          > >>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
          > >> Democratic
          > >>>> Gov. John Lynch,
          > >>>
          > >>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to be the
          > >>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
          > >>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters of NH,
          > >>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
          > >>> Democratic governor.
          > >>>
          > >>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no closer to
          > >>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
          > primary
          > >>> than he did in most states.
          > >>>
          > >>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a population to
          > >>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move there.
          > >>>
          > >>> Gary
          > >>>
          > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>
          > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >>
          > >>
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------
          > >
          > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Blay
          With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet. Voters always have
          Message 4 of 28 , Jan 30, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
            below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
            Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
            their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.

            http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/

            I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples of
            how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
            contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
            occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to support
            your naked assertion.

            Blay



            On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
            >
            >
            > This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
            > form of Condorcet voting. :)
            >
            > On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
            >
            > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
            > >>
            > >> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
            > > to some method of Concorcet, . . .
            > >
            > > I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
            > > superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
            > > interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
            > > choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
            > > intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
            > > on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
            > > increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
            > > theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
            > > would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
            > > elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
            > > compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
            > > ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
            > > etc.
            > >
            > > Blay
            > >
            > >
            > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
            > >>
            > >> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only about 900
            > >> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but there are
            > >> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
            > elected
            > >> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
            > >> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
            > >> elected
            > >> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
            > >> And the
            > >> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
            > inside the
            > >> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
            > >> allow
            > >> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
            > while
            > >> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
            > explain to
            > >> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
            > (5) and
            > >> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
            > right now
            > >> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
            > >>
            > >> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
            > >> 30-year
            > >> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it, and the
            > >> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet. If you
            > >> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the fact is,
            > >> "it's
            > >> beginning to happen."
            > >>
            > >> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
            > >> also got
            > >> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
            > senate, and
            > >> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
            > >> Platform,
            > >> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
            > >> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch with and
            > >> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
            > >>
            > >> Timothy Condon, Esq.
            > >> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
            > >> Cell 813-453-2379
            > >> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
            > >> Tampa, Florida 33606
            > >> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
            > >> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
            > <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
            > >>
            > >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
            > <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
            > >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
            > >>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
            > >>>
            > >>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
            > >>>
            > >>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5 years now)
            > >>>
            > >>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
            > <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
            > >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com><gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>>
            > >>> wrote:
            > >>>
            > >>> Tim Condon wrote:
            > >>>>
            > >>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
            > >>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
            > >>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
            > >>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people migrate
            > >>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
            > >>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the volume
            > >>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
            > >>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
            > >>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
            > >> tell you
            > >>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
            > state
            > >>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
            > >> libertarian-conservative
            > >>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
            > >> other
            > >>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
            > >> Democratic
            > >>>> Gov. John Lynch,
            > >>>
            > >>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to be the
            > >>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
            > >>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters of NH,
            > >>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
            > >>> Democratic governor.
            > >>>
            > >>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
            > closer to
            > >>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
            > primary
            > >>> than he did in most states.
            > >>>
            > >>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a population to
            > >>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move there.
            > >>>
            > >>> Gary
            > >>>
            > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>>
            > >>
            > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >>
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------------------
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
          • Stephen
            Jason probably made his naked assertion knowing that it is common knowledge. Why reenact here all the religious battles of the voting methods community? I
            Message 5 of 28 , Jan 30, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Jason probably made his "naked assertion" knowing that it is common knowledge. Why reenact here all the religious battles of the voting methods community?

              I already provided you with the results of a simulation showing Bayesian regret for various voting methods under conditions of tactical and sincere voting, and IRV is only marginally less sucky than Plurality Voting:
              http://www.electology.org/tactical-voting

              Mike Ossipoff, who wrote the articles for the famous ElectionMethods.org, provides a discussion of various voting systems' susceptibility to tactical voting here:
              http://www.barnsdle.demon.co.uk/vote/compm.html

              However, you are right to dismiss the convoluted theoretical arguments, because we are living in the real world. In the real world it would be a massive leap to change from Plurality to any ranking system, let alone a bad one like IRV. Approval Voting is not only a good voting system, it is a modest step from our current method. This is why Mike Ossipoff endorsed it:
              http://rangevoting.org/OssipoffEnd.html

              When I explain voting reform, I ask people to describe what they would instinctively do when picking a movie with a group of friends at a multiplex. The instinctive methods are Approval and something like a truncated Borda Count. Condorcet's counting method is too complex, and IRV is not only complex, but throws out compromise candidates with the bath.

              --- In freestateproject@yahoogroups.com, Blay <links@...> wrote:
              >
              > With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
              > below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
              > Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
              > their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
              >
              > http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
              >
              > I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples of
              > how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
              > contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
              > occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to support
              > your naked assertion.
              >
              > Blay
              >
              >
              >
              > On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
              > > form of Condorcet voting. :)
            • Jason Sorens
              The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind of naive
              Message 6 of 28 , Jan 30, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                blackmail power.

                On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:

                > With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                > below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                > Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                > their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                >
                > http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                >
                > I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples of
                > how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                > contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
                > occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to support
                > your naked assertion.
                >
                > Blay
                >
                >
                >
                > On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                >>
                >>
                >> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
                >> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                >>
                >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                >>
                >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                >>>>
                >>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
                >>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                >>>
                >>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                >>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                >>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
                >>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                >>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
                >>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
                >>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                >>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
                >>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                >>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                >>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                >>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
                >>> etc.
                >>>
                >>> Blay
                >>>
                >>>
                >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                >>>>
                >>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only about 900
                >>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but there are
                >>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                >> elected
                >>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                >>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                >>>> elected
                >>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                >>>> And the
                >>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                >> inside the
                >>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
                >>>> allow
                >>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                >> while
                >>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                >> explain to
                >>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                >> (5) and
                >>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                >> right now
                >>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
                >>>>
                >>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                >>>> 30-year
                >>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it, and the
                >>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet. If you
                >>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the fact is,
                >>>> "it's
                >>>> beginning to happen."
                >>>>
                >>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                >>>> also got
                >>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                >> senate, and
                >>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                >>>> Platform,
                >>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                >>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch with and
                >>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                >>>>
                >>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                >>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                >>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                >>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                >>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                >>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                >>>> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                >> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                >>>>
                >>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
                >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                >>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
                >>>>
                >>>>>
                >>>>>
                >>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                >>>>>
                >>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                >>>>>
                >>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5 years now)
                >>>>>
                >>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                >>>>>
                >>>>>
                >>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
                >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                >>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com><gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>>
                >>>>> wrote:
                >>>>>
                >>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                >>>>>>
                >>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                >>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                >>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                >>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people migrate
                >>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
                >>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the volume
                >>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                >>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                >>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                >>>> tell you
                >>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                >> state
                >>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                >>>> libertarian-conservative
                >>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                >>>> other
                >>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                >>>> Democratic
                >>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                >>>>>
                >>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to be the
                >>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
                >>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters of NH,
                >>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                >>>>> Democratic governor.
                >>>>>
                >>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                >> closer to
                >>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                >> primary
                >>>>> than he did in most states.
                >>>>>
                >>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a population to
                >>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move there.
                >>>>>
                >>>>> Gary
                >>>>>
                >>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >>>>>
                >>>>>
                >>>>>
                >>>>
                >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >>>>
                >>>>
                >>>
                >>>
                >>>
                >>> ------------------------------------
                >>>
                >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                >>>
                >>>
                >>>
                >>>
                >>>
                >>
                >>
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Stephen
                I usually hear tactical voting discussed in terms of individual isolated voters. Couldn t influential people with resources (say Rush Limbaugh) provide their
                Message 7 of 28 , Jan 30, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  I usually hear tactical voting discussed in terms of individual isolated voters. Couldn't influential people with resources (say Rush Limbaugh) provide their zombie ditto-head armies with a tactical voting plan? I would expect some amount of coordination.

                  >Plus, for libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties' blackmail power.

                  IRV is bad for compromise candidates who are many people's second choice but few people's first choice, like maybe Libertarians. I'm not sure who IRV is good for. Not Libertarians, not Greens, and probably not any other third party.

                  --- In freestateproject@yahoogroups.com, Jason Sorens <jsorens@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                  > even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                  > of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                  > sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                  > candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                  > circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                  > alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                  > libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                  > blackmail power.
                • Blay
                  The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don t have to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its weaknesses. All
                  Message 8 of 28 , Jan 30, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don't have
                    to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its
                    weaknesses. All it takes is one genius to figure it out and tell
                    everyone else how they have to vote to make the gaming work. They don't
                    have to understand how or why it works, just that it does (like driving
                    a car). So Condorcet's supposed complexity would not protect it from
                    tactical voting. Likewise, IRV's simplicity would not make it easier to
                    game.

                    I am not familiar enough with the other factors you mentioned to comment
                    on whether they would weigh for or against one system or the other. I
                    only maintain that Condorcet is susceptible to gaming whereas, from a
                    practical standpoint, IRV is not, and that that is a critical
                    consideration when choosing a voting system for public elections. I do
                    not see anything to refute those contentions in your comments, below.

                    In Condorcet, again, one games the system by ranking one's opponent
                    lower than one really believes, thereby causing him to lose more
                    pairwise contests, thereby improving the chance for one's first choice
                    to prevail. How. specifically, does one game the system under IRV?

                    Blay


                    On 1/30/2011 7:12 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                    > even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                    > of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                    > sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                    > candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                    > circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                    > alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                    > libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                    > blackmail power.
                    >
                    > On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                    >
                    > > With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                    > > below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                    > > Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                    > > their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                    > >
                    > > http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                    > >
                    > > I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples of
                    > > how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                    > > contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
                    > > occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to support
                    > > your naked assertion.
                    > >
                    > > Blay
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable"
                    > than any
                    > >> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                    > >>
                    > >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
                    > >>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                    > >>>
                    > >>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                    > >>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                    > >>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
                    > >>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                    > >>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of
                    > support last
                    > >>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go,
                    > you can
                    > >>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                    > >>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
                    > >>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                    > >>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                    > >>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                    > >>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free
                    > state,
                    > >>> etc.
                    > >>>
                    > >>> Blay
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only
                    > about 900
                    > >>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but
                    > there are
                    > >>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                    > >> elected
                    > >>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                    > >>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                    > >>>> elected
                    > >>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                    > >>>> And the
                    > >>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                    > >> inside the
                    > >>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
                    > >>>> allow
                    > >>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                    > >> while
                    > >>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                    > >> explain to
                    > >>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                    > >> (5) and
                    > >>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                    > >> right now
                    > >>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                    > >>>> 30-year
                    > >>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it,
                    > and the
                    > >>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet.
                    > If you
                    > >>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the
                    > fact is,
                    > >>>> "it's
                    > >>>> beginning to happen."
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                    > >>>> also got
                    > >>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                    > >> senate, and
                    > >>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                    > >>>> Platform,
                    > >>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                    > >>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch
                    > with and
                    > >>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                    > >>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                    > >>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                    > >>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                    > >>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                    > >>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                    > >>>> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                    > <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                    > >> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
                    > <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                    > >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                    > >>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5
                    > years now)
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
                    > <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                    > >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                    > >>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com><gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>>
                    > >>>>> wrote:
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                    > >>>>>>
                    > >>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                    > >>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                    > >>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                    > >>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people
                    > migrate
                    > >>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
                    > >>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the
                    > volume
                    > >>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                    > >>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                    > >>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                    > >>>> tell you
                    > >>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                    > >> state
                    > >>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                    > >>>> libertarian-conservative
                    > >>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                    > >>>> other
                    > >>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                    > >>>> Democratic
                    > >>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to
                    > be the
                    > >>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
                    > >>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters
                    > of NH,
                    > >>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                    > >>>>> Democratic governor.
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                    > >> closer to
                    > >>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                    > >> primary
                    > >>>>> than he did in most states.
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a
                    > population to
                    > >>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move
                    > there.
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> Gary
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>>
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>> ------------------------------------
                    > >>>
                    > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>>
                    > >>
                    > >>
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ------------------------------------
                    > >
                    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                  • Tim Condon
                    Well, everyone, back to the Free State! As I mentioned, there is a bill actually pending in the New Hampshire legislature now which replaces
                    Message 9 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Well, everyone, back to the Free State! As I mentioned, there is a bill
                      actually pending in the New Hampshire legislature now which replaces
                      lesser-of-two-evils voting with "some type" of rank-your-choices. I don't
                      know that it's Condorcet, and I don't know that it's IRV. Could one of you
                      guys (like Steve Cobb, who lives in New Hampshire and is extremely
                      knowledgeable about the different types of voting), look over the bill, and
                      explain to everyone on this list what type of voting plan it advances, and
                      why that particular system will be far superior to
                      lesser-of-two-evils...whether it's Concorcet, IRV, or some other variation?

                      Thanks, Steve! This IS all about the Free State, after all, and the advances
                      we're making there....so that everyone else on this list will be apprised of
                      those facts, and will start packing their bags to move to New Hampshire.
                      Sooner rather than later! Cheers, Porcupines! ---Tim Condon







                      On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Blay <links@...> wrote:

                      > The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don't have
                      > to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its
                      > weaknesses. All it takes is one genius to figure it out and tell
                      > everyone else how they have to vote to make the gaming work. They don't
                      > have to understand how or why it works, just that it does (like driving
                      > a car). So Condorcet's supposed complexity would not protect it from
                      > tactical voting. Likewise, IRV's simplicity would not make it easier to
                      > game.
                      >
                      > I am not familiar enough with the other factors you mentioned to comment
                      > on whether they would weigh for or against one system or the other. I
                      > only maintain that Condorcet is susceptible to gaming whereas, from a
                      > practical standpoint, IRV is not, and that that is a critical
                      > consideration when choosing a voting system for public elections. I do
                      > not see anything to refute those contentions in your comments, below.
                      >
                      > In Condorcet, again, one games the system by ranking one's opponent
                      > lower than one really believes, thereby causing him to lose more
                      > pairwise contests, thereby improving the chance for one's first choice
                      > to prevail. How. specifically, does one game the system under IRV?
                      >
                      > Blay
                      >
                      >
                      > On 1/30/2011 7:12 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                      > > even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                      > > of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                      > > sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                      > > candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                      > > circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                      > > alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                      > > libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                      > > blackmail power.
                      > >
                      > > On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                      > >
                      > > > With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                      > > > below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                      > > > Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                      > > > their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                      > > >
                      > > > http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                      > > >
                      > > > I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples
                      > of
                      > > > how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                      > > > contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
                      > > > occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to
                      > support
                      > > > your naked assertion.
                      > > >
                      > > > Blay
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                      > > >>
                      > > >>
                      > > >> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable"
                      > > than any
                      > > >> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                      > > >>
                      > > >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                      > > >>
                      > > >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in
                      > NH
                      > > >>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                      > > >>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                      > > >>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking
                      > their
                      > > >>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                      > > >>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of
                      > > support last
                      > > >>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go,
                      > > you can
                      > > >>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                      > > >>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no
                      > one
                      > > >>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                      > > >>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                      > > >>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                      > > >>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free
                      > > state,
                      > > >>> etc.
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> Blay
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only
                      > > about 900
                      > > >>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but
                      > > there are
                      > > >>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                      > > >> elected
                      > > >>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                      > > >>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                      > > >>>> elected
                      > > >>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                      > > >>>> And the
                      > > >>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                      > > >> inside the
                      > > >>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet,
                      > (3)
                      > > >>>> allow
                      > > >>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                      > > >> while
                      > > >>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                      > > >> explain to
                      > > >>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                      > > >> (5) and
                      > > >>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                      > > >> right now
                      > > >>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in
                      > NH.
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                      > > >>>> 30-year
                      > > >>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it,
                      > > and the
                      > > >>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet.
                      > > If you
                      > > >>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the
                      > > fact is,
                      > > >>>> "it's
                      > > >>>> beginning to happen."
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                      > > >>>> also got
                      > > >>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                      > > >> senate, and
                      > > >>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                      > > >>>> Platform,
                      > > >>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                      > > >>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch
                      > > with and
                      > > >>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                      > > >>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                      > > >>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                      > > >>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                      > > >>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                      > > >>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                      > > >>>> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net<tim%2540timcondon.net>
                      > >
                      > > <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
                      > > >> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
                      > > <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>
                      > > >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>
                      > > >>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>> wrote:
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5
                      > > years now)
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
                      > > <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>>
                      > > >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>>
                      > > >>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>><gsnyder15%
                      > 40yahoo.com>>
                      > > >>>>> wrote:
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                      > > >>>>>>
                      > > >>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                      > > >>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                      > > >>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                      > > >>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people
                      > > migrate
                      > > >>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state
                      > will
                      > > >>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the
                      > > volume
                      > > >>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                      > > >>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                      > > >>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                      > > >>>> tell you
                      > > >>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                      > > >> state
                      > > >>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                      > > >>>> libertarian-conservative
                      > > >>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                      > > >>>> other
                      > > >>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                      > > >>>> Democratic
                      > > >>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to
                      > > be the
                      > > >>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a
                      > Republican
                      > > >>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters
                      > > of NH,
                      > > >>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                      > > >>>>> Democratic governor.
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                      > > >> closer to
                      > > >>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                      > > >> primary
                      > > >>>>> than he did in most states.
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a
                      > > population to
                      > > >>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move
                      > > there.
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> Gary
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>>
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> ------------------------------------
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>>
                      > > >>
                      > > >>
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > ------------------------------------
                      > > >
                      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Jason Sorens
                      Well, let me put it this way: to know how to vote tactically under Condorcet, you need to know a lot more info than you do to know how to vote tactically under
                      Message 10 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Well, let me put it this way: to know how to vote tactically under
                        Condorcet, you need to know a lot more info than you do to know how to
                        vote tactically under IRV. I think it's unlikely that even one person will
                        be able to figure it out in any normal-size political election with
                        several candidates. But I don't support either Condorcet or IRV for
                        political elections - like Steve, I think Approval is the best realistic
                        reform.

                        On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:

                        > The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don't have
                        > to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its
                        > weaknesses. All it takes is one genius to figure it out and tell
                        > everyone else how they have to vote to make the gaming work. They don't
                        > have to understand how or why it works, just that it does (like driving
                        > a car). So Condorcet's supposed complexity would not protect it from
                        > tactical voting. Likewise, IRV's simplicity would not make it easier to
                        > game.
                        >
                        > I am not familiar enough with the other factors you mentioned to comment
                        > on whether they would weigh for or against one system or the other. I
                        > only maintain that Condorcet is susceptible to gaming whereas, from a
                        > practical standpoint, IRV is not, and that that is a critical
                        > consideration when choosing a voting system for public elections. I do
                        > not see anything to refute those contentions in your comments, below.
                        >
                        > In Condorcet, again, one games the system by ranking one's opponent
                        > lower than one really believes, thereby causing him to lose more
                        > pairwise contests, thereby improving the chance for one's first choice
                        > to prevail. How. specifically, does one game the system under IRV?
                        >
                        > Blay
                        >
                        >
                        > On 1/30/2011 7:12 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                        >>
                        >>
                        >> The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                        >> even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                        >> of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                        >> sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                        >> candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                        >> circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                        >> alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                        >> libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                        >> blackmail power.
                        >>
                        >> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                        >>
                        >>> With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                        >>> below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                        >>> Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                        >>> their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                        >>>
                        >>> http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                        >>>
                        >>> I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples of
                        >>> how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                        >>> contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
                        >>> occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to support
                        >>> your naked assertion.
                        >>>
                        >>> Blay
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>> On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable"
                        >> than any
                        >>>> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                        >>>>
                        >>>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                        >>>>
                        >>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
                        >>>>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                        >>>>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                        >>>>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
                        >>>>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                        >>>>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of
                        >> support last
                        >>>>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go,
                        >> you can
                        >>>>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                        >>>>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
                        >>>>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                        >>>>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                        >>>>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                        >>>>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free
                        >> state,
                        >>>>> etc.
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>> Blay
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only
                        >> about 900
                        >>>>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but
                        >> there are
                        >>>>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                        >>>> elected
                        >>>>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                        >>>>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                        >>>>>> elected
                        >>>>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                        >>>>>> And the
                        >>>>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                        >>>> inside the
                        >>>>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
                        >>>>>> allow
                        >>>>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                        >>>> while
                        >>>>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                        >>>> explain to
                        >>>>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                        >>>> (5) and
                        >>>>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                        >>>> right now
                        >>>>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                        >>>>>> 30-year
                        >>>>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it,
                        >> and the
                        >>>>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet.
                        >> If you
                        >>>>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the
                        >> fact is,
                        >>>>>> "it's
                        >>>>>> beginning to happen."
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                        >>>>>> also got
                        >>>>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                        >>>> senate, and
                        >>>>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                        >>>>>> Platform,
                        >>>>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                        >>>>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch
                        >> with and
                        >>>>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                        >>>>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                        >>>>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                        >>>>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                        >>>>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                        >>>>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                        >>>>>> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                        >> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                        >>>> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net>
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
                        >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                        >>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                        >>>>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5
                        >> years now)
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
                        >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                        >>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                        >>>>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com><gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>>
                        >>>>>>> wrote:
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                        >>>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                        >>>>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                        >>>>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                        >>>>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people
                        >> migrate
                        >>>>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
                        >>>>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the
                        >> volume
                        >>>>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                        >>>>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                        >>>>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                        >>>>>> tell you
                        >>>>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                        >>>> state
                        >>>>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                        >>>>>> libertarian-conservative
                        >>>>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                        >>>>>> other
                        >>>>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                        >>>>>> Democratic
                        >>>>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to
                        >> be the
                        >>>>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
                        >>>>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters
                        >> of NH,
                        >>>>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                        >>>>>>> Democratic governor.
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                        >>>> closer to
                        >>>>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                        >>>> primary
                        >>>>>>> than he did in most states.
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a
                        >> population to
                        >>>>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move
                        >> there.
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> Gary
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>>
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>> ------------------------------------
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>> ------------------------------------
                        >>>
                        >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • Jason Sorens
                        The bill is to institute Approval Voting, which is very simple and doesn t involve ranking. In any race, you can vote for as many candidates as you like, and
                        Message 11 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          The bill is to institute Approval Voting, which is very simple and doesn't
                          involve ranking. In any race, you can vote for as many candidates as you
                          like, and the candidates with the most votes wins. It's called "Approval"
                          because you have a chance to "approve" or "disapprove" each candidate.
                          More on AV:
                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting

                          On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Tim Condon wrote:

                          > Well, everyone, back to the Free State! As I mentioned, there is a bill
                          > actually pending in the New Hampshire legislature now which replaces
                          > lesser-of-two-evils voting with "some type" of rank-your-choices. I don't
                          > know that it's Condorcet, and I don't know that it's IRV. Could one of you
                          > guys (like Steve Cobb, who lives in New Hampshire and is extremely
                          > knowledgeable about the different types of voting), look over the bill, and
                          > explain to everyone on this list what type of voting plan it advances, and
                          > why that particular system will be far superior to
                          > lesser-of-two-evils...whether it's Concorcet, IRV, or some other variation?
                          >
                          > Thanks, Steve! This IS all about the Free State, after all, and the advances
                          > we're making there....so that everyone else on this list will be apprised of
                          > those facts, and will start packing their bags to move to New Hampshire.
                          > Sooner rather than later! Cheers, Porcupines! ---Tim Condon
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Blay <links@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >> The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don't have
                          >> to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its
                          >> weaknesses. All it takes is one genius to figure it out and tell
                          >> everyone else how they have to vote to make the gaming work. They don't
                          >> have to understand how or why it works, just that it does (like driving
                          >> a car). So Condorcet's supposed complexity would not protect it from
                          >> tactical voting. Likewise, IRV's simplicity would not make it easier to
                          >> game.
                          >>
                          >> I am not familiar enough with the other factors you mentioned to comment
                          >> on whether they would weigh for or against one system or the other. I
                          >> only maintain that Condorcet is susceptible to gaming whereas, from a
                          >> practical standpoint, IRV is not, and that that is a critical
                          >> consideration when choosing a voting system for public elections. I do
                          >> not see anything to refute those contentions in your comments, below.
                          >>
                          >> In Condorcet, again, one games the system by ranking one's opponent
                          >> lower than one really believes, thereby causing him to lose more
                          >> pairwise contests, thereby improving the chance for one's first choice
                          >> to prevail. How. specifically, does one game the system under IRV?
                          >>
                          >> Blay
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> On 1/30/2011 7:12 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                          >>>
                          >>>
                          >>> The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples, although
                          >>> even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                          >>> of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                          >>> sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                          >>> candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                          >>> circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                          >>> alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                          >>> libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                          >>> blackmail power.
                          >>>
                          >>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                          >>>
                          >>>> With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                          >>>> below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                          >>>> Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                          >>>> their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                          >>>>
                          >>>> http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                          >>>>
                          >>>> I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples
                          >> of
                          >>>> how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                          >>>> contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would never
                          >>>> occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to
                          >> support
                          >>>> your naked assertion.
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Blay
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable"
                          >>> than any
                          >>>>> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in
                          >> NH
                          >>>>>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                          >>>>>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                          >>>>>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking
                          >> their
                          >>>>>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                          >>>>>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of
                          >>> support last
                          >>>>>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go,
                          >>> you can
                          >>>>>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                          >>>>>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no
                          >> one
                          >>>>>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                          >>>>>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                          >>>>>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                          >>>>>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free
                          >>> state,
                          >>>>>> etc.
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>> Blay
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only
                          >>> about 900
                          >>>>>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but
                          >>> there are
                          >>>>>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                          >>>>> elected
                          >>>>>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                          >>>>>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                          >>>>>>> elected
                          >>>>>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                          >>>>>>> And the
                          >>>>>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                          >>>>> inside the
                          >>>>>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet,
                          >> (3)
                          >>>>>>> allow
                          >>>>>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                          >>>>> while
                          >>>>>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                          >>>>> explain to
                          >>>>>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                          >>>>> (5) and
                          >>>>>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                          >>>>> right now
                          >>>>>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in
                          >> NH.
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                          >>>>>>> 30-year
                          >>>>>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it,
                          >>> and the
                          >>>>>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet.
                          >>> If you
                          >>>>>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the
                          >>> fact is,
                          >>>>>>> "it's
                          >>>>>>> beginning to happen."
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                          >>>>>>> also got
                          >>>>>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                          >>>>> senate, and
                          >>>>>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                          >>>>>>> Platform,
                          >>>>>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                          >>>>>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch
                          >>> with and
                          >>>>>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                          >>>>>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                          >>>>>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                          >>>>>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                          >>>>>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                          >>>>>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                          >>>>>>> Email: tim@... <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net<tim%2540timcondon.net>
                          >>>
                          >>> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
                          >>>>> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...
                          >>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>
                          >>>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>
                          >>>>>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>> wrote:
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5
                          >>> years now)
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...
                          >>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>>
                          >>>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>>
                          >>>>>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>><gsnyder15%
                          >> 40yahoo.com>>
                          >>>>>>>> wrote:
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                          >>>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                          >>>>>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                          >>>>>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                          >>>>>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people
                          >>> migrate
                          >>>>>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state
                          >> will
                          >>>>>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the
                          >>> volume
                          >>>>>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                          >>>>>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                          >>>>>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                          >>>>>>> tell you
                          >>>>>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                          >>>>> state
                          >>>>>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                          >>>>>>> libertarian-conservative
                          >>>>>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                          >>>>>>> other
                          >>>>>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                          >>>>>>> Democratic
                          >>>>>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to
                          >>> be the
                          >>>>>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a
                          >> Republican
                          >>>>>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters
                          >>> of NH,
                          >>>>>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                          >>>>>>>> Democratic governor.
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                          >>>>> closer to
                          >>>>>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                          >>>>> primary
                          >>>>>>>> than he did in most states.
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a
                          >>> population to
                          >>>>>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move
                          >>> there.
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> Gary
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>> ------------------------------------
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>>
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> ------------------------------------
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>
                          >>>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> ------------------------------------
                          >>
                          >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          >
                        • GaryT
                          I like that analogy, NH to USA ≡ Hong Kong to Republic of China ... From: Tim Condon To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 1:02
                          Message 12 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I like that analogy, NH to USA ≡ Hong Kong to Republic of China


                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Tim Condon
                            To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 1:02 PM
                            Subject: Re: [FSP] Freestaters everywhere in NH



                            He's a Tea Party conservative, Gary. As such, he is libertarian on fiscal,
                            self-defense, 2nd Amendment, spending, and broad liberty and Constitutional
                            issues. Although I don't know for sure, I would expect that he may be
                            against gay marriage, drug legalization (although not necessarily medical
                            marijuana), abortion (which can be argued either way from a libertarian
                            perspective), etc.

                            The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and libertarian-conservatives
                            in elected political positions in New Hampshire, and hundreds more in
                            various important activist and leadership positions. The more that Free
                            State Project people migrate into New Hampshire, as intended, the more
                            attractive the state will become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will
                            increase the volume and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon
                            become a beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                            all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can tell you that
                            there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the state
                            legislature this year that every libertarian and libertarian-conservative
                            will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and other
                            statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by Democratic Gov.
                            John Lynch, and they will be passed by the state legislature over the
                            governor's veto. These types of bills run the gauntlet from reductions in
                            spending, to reductions in state government power, to reductions in taxes
                            and fees, to increasing personal liberty in various ways, to evening up the
                            power imbalance between the political/government/ruling classes and the
                            people of New Hampshire, and many others.

                            Watch what is happening in the Free State, everyone! You will see what a
                            determined, vocal, and increasingly effective minority of
                            liberty-lovers---eventually to become a majority---can do!
                            In the not-too-distant future, America may for the most part look like
                            something along the lines of Mexico, Russia, or Zimbabwe. But at the same
                            time, New Hampshire will become to America what Hong Kong was to Maoist
                            China...a shining beacon of individual liberty, free market capitalism,
                            health individualism, and an increasingly small state government structure.

                            Y'all come, Porcupines!

                            Timothy Condon, Esq.
                            12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                            Cell 813-453-2379
                            Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                            Tampa, Florida 33606
                            813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                            Email: tim@...

                            NOTE: The contents of this e-mail and attachments are intended solely for
                            the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
                            information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if
                            this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert
                            the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. If
                            you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use,
                            dissemination, distribution, copying, or storage of this message is
                            prohibited.

                            On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 AM, GaryT <garyonthenet@...> wrote:

                            >
                            >
                            > After reading the article, I think its a step in the right direction.
                            > (I do see a pun there)
                            >
                            > Of course as a purist libertarian, I would be hoping for so much more. How
                            > libertarian is Kimball?
                            > It says he shyed away from gay marriage and abortion, and I would presume
                            > drug legalization too.
                            > Yet he says he is not a big tent Republican.
                            >
                            > Sounds a bit like a libertarian leaning Republican. Better than otherwise I
                            >
                            > guess given the context.
                            >
                            > Gary T
                            >
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: "Tim Condon" <tim@... <tim%40timcondon.net>>
                            > To: "FS FSP" <freestateproject@yahoogroups.com<freestateproject%40yahoogroups.com>
                            > >
                            > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 7:29 PM
                            > Subject: [FSP] Freestaters everywhere in NH
                            >
                            > Everyone, this is a picture from today's New York Times:
                            >
                            > [image: KIMBALL-popup.jpg]
                            >
                            > Jack Kimball, the guy in the center of the picture, is a Tea Party favorite
                            > in the Free State. He had plentiful support from libertarians and
                            > Freestaters. The guy in the ski cap on the left is me, Tim Condon, a
                            > Freestater and former member of the FSP national board of directors. There
                            > were dozens of Freestaters voting at the GOP meeting. Read the
                            > article<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/politics/26kimball.html?_r=1
                            > >and
                            >
                            > note that it mentions
                            > "New Hampshire residents, with their libertarian leanings...." and "During
                            > the race, many dismissed Mr. Kimball's appeal as sharply limited because of
                            > his firm conservative stance. As a candidate, he said he was 'not a
                            > big-tent
                            > Republican,' though he generally steered clear of social issues like
                            > abortion and same-sex marriage." He could not have won without the support
                            > of libertarians and people who have moved to New Hampshire as part of the
                            > Free State Project. FYI, if you haven't started planning your move, now
                            > might be a good time to do so!
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            >
                            > ------------------------------------
                            >
                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >
                            >

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • GaryT
                            I will make a statement based upon my political, mathematical, and philosophical intuition. Standard democratic voting works well within socialistically viable
                            Message 13 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I will make a statement based upon my political, mathematical, and philosophical intuition.

                              Standard democratic voting works well within socialistically viable population levels, say between 30 and 1000 people.
                              After that, I think it unfairly systemically concentrates power in a way that democratic voting is not envisioned to result in.

                              In large democratic populations, voting needs to be in some form of IRV to be representative and fair.

                              Gary T


                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: Tim Condon
                              To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2011 1:36 AM
                              Subject: Re: [FSP] Freestaters everywhere in NH



                              Hi Jason. I've got to say, I don't think this discussion to be (overly)
                              off-topic. Why? Because all types of things are going to be thought about
                              and considered in the Free State about government and its form, functions,
                              and mechanics that have never been "allowed" to be discussed and advanced
                              virtually anywhere in the past. Usually because an anointed political
                              cognoscenti has declared certain subjects and threads of thought to be "out
                              of bounds." Changing the lesser-of-two-evils voting system to some form of
                              ranking system is one of them. But in New Hampshire, *nothing* is out of
                              bounds that will help bring our state government into the 21st century and
                              make it less intrusive, less overbearing, less dangerous, more efficient,
                              less expensive, and more hospitable to liberty and individualism. Thus,
                              talking about IRV, Condorcet, and other "ranking methods" of voting should
                              be thought of as well within the imprimatur of the Free State Project and
                              its participants. ---Tim Condon

                              On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens <jsorens@...> wrote:

                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable" than any
                              > form of Condorcet voting. :)
                              >
                              > On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                              >
                              > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                              > >>
                              > >> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in NH
                              > > to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                              > >
                              > > I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                              > > superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                              > > interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking their
                              > > choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                              > > intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of support last
                              > > on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go, you can
                              > > increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                              > > theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no one
                              > > would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                              > > elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                              > > compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what flavor
                              > > ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free state,
                              > > etc.
                              > >
                              > > Blay
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                              > >>
                              > >> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only about 900
                              > >> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but there are
                              > >> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                              > elected
                              > >> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                              > >> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have been
                              > >> elected
                              > >> chairman of the party without the support of Republican Freestaters.
                              > >> And the
                              > >> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal inside
                              > the
                              > >> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet, (3)
                              > >> allow
                              > >> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                              > while
                              > >> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to explain
                              > to
                              > >> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws, (5) and
                              > >> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening right
                              > now
                              > >> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in NH.
                              > >>
                              > >> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as a
                              > >> 30-year
                              > >> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it, and the
                              > >> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet. If you
                              > >> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the fact is,
                              > >> "it's
                              > >> beginning to happen."
                              > >>
                              > >> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                              > >> also got
                              > >> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state senate,
                              > and
                              > >> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                              > >> Platform,
                              > >> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become almost
                              > >> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch with and
                              > >> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                              > >>
                              > >> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                              > >> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                              > >> Cell 813-453-2379
                              > >> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                              > >> Tampa, Florida 33606
                              > >> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                              > >> Email: tim@... <tim%40timcondon.net> <mailto:
                              > tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net>>
                              >
                              > >>
                              > >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...<dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                              > >> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com>>> wrote:
                              > >>
                              > >>>
                              > >>>
                              > >>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                              > >>>
                              > >>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                              > >>>
                              > >>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5 years now)
                              > >>>
                              > >>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                              > >>>
                              > >>>
                              > >>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...<gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                              > >> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com>><gsnyder15%
                              > 40yahoo.com>>
                              >
                              > >>> wrote:
                              > >>>
                              > >>> Tim Condon wrote:
                              > >>>>
                              > >>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                              > >>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                              > >>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                              > >>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people migrate
                              > >>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state will
                              > >>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the volume
                              > >>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                              > >>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                              > >>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                              > >> tell you
                              > >>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the state
                              > >>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                              > >> libertarian-conservative
                              > >>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats and
                              > >> other
                              > >>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                              > >> Democratic
                              > >>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                              > >>>
                              > >>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to be the
                              > >>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a Republican
                              > >>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters of NH,
                              > >>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                              > >>> Democratic governor.
                              > >>>
                              > >>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no closer to
                              > >>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                              > primary
                              > >>> than he did in most states.
                              > >>>
                              > >>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a population to
                              > >>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move there.
                              > >>>
                              > >>> Gary
                              > >>>
                              > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              > >>>
                              > >>>
                              > >>>
                              > >>
                              > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              > >>
                              > >>
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > ------------------------------------
                              > >
                              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              >
                              >
                              >

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Tim Condon
                              Then I stand corrected! And gladly so. It appears that the best choice among Condorcet, IRV, and Approval is being lofted for voting in New Hampshire.
                              Message 14 of 28 , Jan 31, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Then I stand corrected! And gladly so. It appears that the best choice among
                                Condorcet, IRV, and Approval is being lofted for voting in New Hampshire.
                                Excellent stuff!

                                Can anyone name any other state among the 57 (according to Obama) that is
                                even considering modifying the voting system to better empower good
                                candidates and discerning voters?

                                Of course not! "Only in the Free State." ---Tim Condon







                                On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Jason Sorens <jsorens@...> wrote:

                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > The bill is to institute Approval Voting, which is very simple and doesn't
                                > involve ranking. In any race, you can vote for as many candidates as you
                                > like, and the candidates with the most votes wins. It's called "Approval"
                                > because you have a chance to "approve" or "disapprove" each candidate.
                                > More on AV:
                                > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting
                                >
                                >
                                > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Tim Condon wrote:
                                >
                                > > Well, everyone, back to the Free State! As I mentioned, there is a bill
                                > > actually pending in the New Hampshire legislature now which replaces
                                > > lesser-of-two-evils voting with "some type" of rank-your-choices. I don't
                                > > know that it's Condorcet, and I don't know that it's IRV. Could one of
                                > you
                                > > guys (like Steve Cobb, who lives in New Hampshire and is extremely
                                > > knowledgeable about the different types of voting), look over the bill,
                                > and
                                > > explain to everyone on this list what type of voting plan it advances,
                                > and
                                > > why that particular system will be far superior to
                                > > lesser-of-two-evils...whether it's Concorcet, IRV, or some other
                                > variation?
                                > >
                                > > Thanks, Steve! This IS all about the Free State, after all, and the
                                > advances
                                > > we're making there....so that everyone else on this list will be apprised
                                > of
                                > > those facts, and will start packing their bags to move to New Hampshire.
                                > > Sooner rather than later! Cheers, Porcupines! ---Tim Condon
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Blay <links@...<links%40eblay.com>>
                                > wrote:
                                > >
                                > >> The complexity of the voting system is irrelevant -- people don't have
                                > >> to understand how a voting system works or why in order to exploit its
                                > >> weaknesses. All it takes is one genius to figure it out and tell
                                > >> everyone else how they have to vote to make the gaming work. They don't
                                > >> have to understand how or why it works, just that it does (like driving
                                > >> a car). So Condorcet's supposed complexity would not protect it from
                                > >> tactical voting. Likewise, IRV's simplicity would not make it easier to
                                > >> game.
                                > >>
                                > >> I am not familiar enough with the other factors you mentioned to comment
                                > >> on whether they would weigh for or against one system or the other. I
                                > >> only maintain that Condorcet is susceptible to gaming whereas, from a
                                > >> practical standpoint, IRV is not, and that that is a critical
                                > >> consideration when choosing a voting system for public elections. I do
                                > >> not see anything to refute those contentions in your comments, below.
                                > >>
                                > >> In Condorcet, again, one games the system by ranking one's opponent
                                > >> lower than one really believes, thereby causing him to lose more
                                > >> pairwise contests, thereby improving the chance for one's first choice
                                > >> to prevail. How. specifically, does one game the system under IRV?
                                > >>
                                > >> Blay
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >> On 1/30/2011 7:12 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                                > >>>
                                > >>>
                                > >>> The Bayesian regret studies that Steve Cobb linked are examples,
                                > although
                                > >>> even those are probably too hard on Condorcet, since they assume a kind
                                > >>> of naive strategy rather than rational voting. Condorcet voting is
                                > >>> sufficiently complex that with a large number of voters and several
                                > >>> candidates, it's very difficult for ordinary voters under ordinary
                                > >>> circumstances to know how to vote tactically. IRV is simpler, & that
                                > >>> alone makes it easier to game under ordinary circumstances. Plus, for
                                > >>> libertarians, IRV is especially bad since it eliminates third parties'
                                > >>> blackmail power.
                                > >>>
                                > >>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                                > >>>
                                > >>>> With all due respect, I think you are wrong. Reason #3 in the article
                                > >>>> below articulates well my reason for being concerned about Condorcet.
                                > >>>> Voters always have the incentive to "bury" popular opponents to give
                                > >>>> their candidate the best chance to win, as the article explains.
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> http://www.fairvote.org/why-i-prefer-irv-to-condorcet/
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> I have never seen any but the most convoluted and outlandish examples
                                > >> of
                                > >>>> how IRV can theoretically be gamed. The examples always involve a very
                                > >>>> contrived set of ballots with missing sets of rankings that would
                                > never
                                > >>>> occur in a natural distribution. Please provide some evidence to
                                > >> support
                                > >>>> your naked assertion.
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> Blay
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> On 1/29/2011 9:57 PM, Jason Sorens wrote:
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>> This is a bit off-topic, but... IRV is actually more "gameable"
                                > >>> than any
                                > >>>>> form of Condorcet voting. :)
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Blay wrote:
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> And the laws and rules being changed to . . . (2) switch voting in
                                > >> NH
                                > >>>>>> to some method of Concorcet, . . .
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>> I hope that IRV would be chosen instead of Condorcet. Condorcet is
                                > >>>>>> superior in choosing the best compromise among people who are truly
                                > >>>>>> interested in the best compromise. It relies on everyone ranking
                                > >> their
                                > >>>>>> choices honestly. But it is very subject to "gaming", i.e. by
                                > >>>>>> intentionally choosing to rank candidates who have a lot of
                                > >>> support last
                                > >>>>>> on the ballot instead of where you really think they should go,
                                > >>> you can
                                > >>>>>> increase the chances of your candidate winning. While IRV can
                                > >>>>>> theoretically be gamed, doing so is so unlikely to succeed that no
                                > >> one
                                > >>>>>> would ever do it. I believe IRV is clearly superior for public
                                > >>>>>> elections. Condorcet is superior where everyone wants the best
                                > >>>>>> compromise to win, e.g. choosing "best picture", choosing what
                                > flavor
                                > >>>>>> ice cream to order for the class, choosing where to locate a free
                                > >>> state,
                                > >>>>>> etc.
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>> Blay
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>> On 1/29/2011 11:21 AM, Tim Condon wrote:
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> I Agree with Dreepa, it *is* still early in the process. Only
                                > >>> about 900
                                > >>>>>>> (self) identified Freestaters have moved into the state...but
                                > >>> there are
                                > >>>>>>> already *huge* inroads being made. Bill O'Brien couldn't have been
                                > >>>>> elected
                                > >>>>>>> as Speaker of the House without the support of politically active
                                > >>>>>>> Freestaters in the Republican Party. Jack Kimball couldn't have
                                > been
                                > >>>>>>> elected
                                > >>>>>>> chairman of the party without the support of Republican
                                > Freestaters.
                                > >>>>>>> And the
                                > >>>>>>> laws and rules being changed to (1) make concealed carry legal
                                > >>>>> inside the
                                > >>>>>>> state house, (2) switch voting in NH to some method of Concorcet,
                                > >> (3)
                                > >>>>>>> allow
                                > >>>>>>> any citizen to videotape any police officer or other state employee
                                > >>>>> while
                                > >>>>>>> acting as an agent of the state, (4) allow defense attorneys to
                                > >>>>> explain to
                                > >>>>>>> jurors about jury nullification and their power to nullify laws,
                                > >>>>> (5) and
                                > >>>>>>> many others of similar import...all those couldn't be happening
                                > >>>>> right now
                                > >>>>>>> without the help and support of politically active Freestaters in
                                > >> NH.
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> And we haven't even started yet. Gary. I've always seen the FSP as
                                > a
                                > >>>>>>> 30-year
                                > >>>>>>> plus movement and project. We're now about seven years into it,
                                > >>> and the
                                > >>>>>>> number that triggers the migration hasn't even been reached yet.
                                > >>> If you
                                > >>>>>>> don't want to join us in the Free State, that's okay, but the
                                > >>> fact is,
                                > >>>>>>> "it's
                                > >>>>>>> beginning to happen."
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> Oh yeah, one other thing: Yes, we've got a Democrat governor. We've
                                > >>>>>>> also got
                                > >>>>>>> veto-proof Republican majorities in the state house, the state
                                > >>>>> senate, and
                                > >>>>>>> the state executive council. They all believe in the NH State GOP
                                > >>>>>>> Platform,
                                > >>>>>>> which is pretty damned good. The Democrat governor has become
                                > almost
                                > >>>>>>> irrelevant. In 2012 we'll have a Republican governor, in touch
                                > >>> with and
                                > >>>>>>> supported by Republican Freestaters from all over NH.
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> Timothy Condon, Esq.
                                > >>>>>>> 12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
                                > >>>>>>> Cell 813-453-2379
                                > >>>>>>> Ofc.: 307 S. Fielding Ave., Suite #2
                                > >>>>>>> Tampa, Florida 33606
                                > >>>>>>> 813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
                                > >>>>>>> Email: tim@... <tim%40timcondon.net> <mailto:
                                > tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net><tim%2540timcondon.net>
                                > >>>
                                > >>> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net> <tim%
                                > 2540timcondon.net>>
                                > >>>>> <mailto:tim%40timcondon.net <tim%2540timcondon.net> <tim%
                                > 2540timcondon.net>>
                                >
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dreepa@ <dreepa@...<dreepa%40yahoo.com>
                                > >>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com> <dreepa%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>>
                                > >>>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com> <dreepa%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>>
                                >
                                > >>>>>>> <mailto:dreepa%40yahoo.com <dreepa%2540yahoo.com> <dreepa%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>>> wrote:
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> Gary how does that explain the dozen fspers elected to office?
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> Give it two years and then see what you think.
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> In my mind it is still super early ( and I have been here 5
                                > >>> years now)
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> And I love it here even if we got no more movers.
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 7:22 PM, Gary Snyder <gsnyder15@...<gsnyder15%40yahoo.com>
                                > >>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com> <gsnyder15%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>>
                                > >>>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com> <gsnyder15%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>>
                                > >>>>>>> <mailto:gsnyder15%40yahoo.com <gsnyder15%2540yahoo.com><gsnyder15%
                                > 2540yahoo.com>><gsnyder15%
                                >
                                > >> 40yahoo.com>>
                                > >>>>>>>> wrote:
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> Tim Condon wrote:
                                > >>>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>> The point is, there are dozens of libertarians and
                                > >>>>>>>>> libertarian-conservatives in elected political positions in New
                                > >>>>>>>>> Hampshire, and hundreds more in various important activist and
                                > >>>>>>>>> leadership positions. The more that Free State Project people
                                > >>> migrate
                                > >>>>>>>>> into New Hampshire, as intended, the more attractive the state
                                > >> will
                                > >>>>>>>>> become to other liberty-lovers. That in turn will increase the
                                > >>> volume
                                > >>>>>>>>> and speed of the migration...and so forth. It will soon become a
                                > >>>>>>>>> beneficial cycle that will continue to benefit New Hampshire and
                                > >>>>>>>>> all its people. We're not anywhere near "there" yet, but I can
                                > >>>>>>> tell you
                                > >>>>>>>>> that there are dozens of laws being pushed and considered by the
                                > >>>>> state
                                > >>>>>>>>> legislature this year that every libertarian and
                                > >>>>>>> libertarian-conservative
                                > >>>>>>>>> will be thrilled with. These laws are opposed by all Democrats
                                > and
                                > >>>>>>> other
                                > >>>>>>>>> statists (including bad Republicans), they will be vetoed by
                                > >>>>>>> Democratic
                                > >>>>>>>>> Gov. John Lynch,
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> I remember about 10 years ago when the case was made for NH to
                                > >>> be the
                                > >>>>>>>> Free State, part of that case included, "Hey, we've got a
                                > >> Republican
                                > >>>>>>>> governor!". Ten years later, I wonder how those same supporters
                                > >>> of NH,
                                > >>>>>>>> who included that above argument, would explain that NH now has a
                                > >>>>>>>> Democratic governor.
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> I thought it was a strong sign three years ago that NH was no
                                > >>>>> closer to
                                > >>>>>>>> freedom than most states when Ron Paul fared no better in the NH
                                > >>>>> primary
                                > >>>>>>>> than he did in most states.
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> I think now as I did then: that NH simply has too big a
                                > >>> population to
                                > >>>>>>>> likely succeed should a few thousand free-staters make the move
                                > >>> there.
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> Gary
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>> ------------------------------------
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>>
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> ------------------------------------
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>>
                                > >>>
                                > >>>
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >> ------------------------------------
                                > >>
                                > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >>
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                                >
                                >


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.