There is that study where they plot % of supporters for a policy vs likelyhood of government adopting a policy, and segregate supports from bottom 90% to top 10%. Gilens and page
Is there a version for other countries?
Any one with favorable or at least better results?
I mean like potentially ranking candidates without regard for voting strategy. Or choosing a favorite disregarding electability. Presumably we’d like to track if our voting tracks with voter preferences
Edit for clarification: i mean pre-election polls that dont count toward election
I read that people generally breath in 21% oxygen air and breath out 16% oxygen air. If you kept recycling that air (like if you were breathing in and out of a paper bag) presumably the oxygen concentration would get lower and lower till you pass out or get brain damage or something bad.
If people fall asleep face to face cuddling, it is not sealed like a paper bag, but also not a well mixed environment. Presumably there is some sort of steady state percentage where oxygen used by person matches oxygen being mixed in from the fresh surrounding air. What is that steady state percentage?
Maybe some people end up breathing in as the other is breathing out as they sleep (and them breathing on eachothers faces significantly), and that is some sort of worst case. Why would that be worst case?
Person A breath out 16% and person B breathes in 16%
Then Person B breaths out 11% and Person A in 11% etc etc until dangerously low. Ik there is at least some mixing with the more oxygenated air. Idk how the percentage exchange would go.
I am using presumably pretty loosely. These assumptions are in question.
I read that people generally breath in 21% oxygen air and breath out 16% oxygen air. If you kept recycling that air (like if you were breathing in and out of a paper bag) presumably the oxygen concentration would get lower and lower till you pass out or get brain damage or something bad.
If people fall asleep face to face cuddling, it is not sealed like a paper bag, but also not a well mixed environment. Presumably there is some sort of steady state percentage where oxygen used by person matches oxygen being mixed in from the fresh surrounding air. What is that steady state percentage?
Maybe some people end up breathing in as the other is breathing out as they sleep (and them breathing on eachothers faces significantly), and that is some sort of worst case. Why would that be worst case?
Person A breath out 16% and person B breathes in 16%
Then Person B breaths out 11% and Person A in 11% etc etc until dangerously low. Ik there is at least some mixing with the more oxygenated air. Idk how the percentage exchange would go.
I am using presumably pretty loosely. These assumptions are in question.
Also, do people have a reflex to move during sleep if they arent getting much oxygen?
I have heard that claim multiple times.
Butt:
For ballot counting for RCV, couldnt you assign a ballot id to each permmutation so that its like you’re counting votes for n! candidates (each “candidate” in this case is a preferential ordering)? In principle is it really that different to audit?
Either way you’re just trusting a count (but n vs n! effective candidates) and the counts are published. With RCV you would need an additional algorithm to get final result, but everyone would have the data to check the results themselves (assuming data is accurate). Could publish a video each year executing RCV demonstrating how the results are gotten.
Some problems:
n! gets large fast - could have a filtering round using approval voting and use the top 3 or 4 candidates for RCV round. Approval voting first pass would get rid of spoiler effect. Also, I believe mixing voting systems with different strategic voting vulnerabilities makes strategic voting much harder.
RCV may be difficult to understand for voters, and people may just vote a single candidate - can implement the ballot in flowchart form where you repeatedly ask “what is your favorite candidate among the following list”. One bubble for each preferential ordering.
That forces everyone that made it to the second round to be ranked in every ballot.
Monotonicity criterion and Condorcet criterion violation in RCV stage: well i dont really have an answer for this. Using the same ballot i described, you can use condorcet voting by default and if no condorcet winner you can resort to RCV. Approval voting violates condorcet criterion but can at least guarantee condorcet criterion for finalists.
For condorcet-RCV strategic voting:
Individually, both have standard strategies of burying. In condorcet voting individually, the standard strategy is to place a strong opponent artificially low. In RCV, you may push your favorite down. These are contradictory strategies.
I have heard that claim multiple times.
Butt:
For ballot counting for RCV, couldnt you assign a ballot id to each permmutation so that its like you’re counting votes for n! candidates (each “candidate” in this case is a preferential ordering)? In principle is it really that different to audit?
Either way you’re just trusting a count (but n vs n! effective candidates) and the counts are published. With RCV you would need an additional algorithm to get final result, but everyone would have the data to check the results themselves (assuming data is accurate). Could publish a video each year executing RCV demonstrating how the results are gotten.
Some problems:
n! gets large fast - could have a filtering round using approval voting and use the top 3 or 4 candidates for RCV round. Approval voting first pass would get rid of spoiler effect. Also, I believe mixing voting systems with different strategic voting vulnerabilities makes strategic voting much harder.
RCV may be difficult to understand for voters, and people may just vote a single candidate - can implement the ballot in flowchart form where you repeatedly ask “what is your favorite candidate among the following list”. One bubble for each preferential ordering.
That forces everyone that made it to the second round to be ranked in every ballot.
Monotonicity criterion and Condorcet criterion violation in RCV stage: well i dont really have an answer for this. Using the same ballot i described, you can use condorcet voting by default and if no condorcet winner you can resort to RCV. Approval voting violates condorcet criterion but can at least guarantee condorcet criterion for finalists.
For condorcet-RCV strategic voting:
Individually, both have standard strategies of burying. In condorcet voting individually, the standard strategy is to place a strong opponent artificially low. In RCV, you may push your favorite down. These are contradictory strategies.
Is there a strategy that works well against the combo, by ensuring the election goes to RCV stage or stays in condorcet? Idk.
What kinds of fraud are easily detectable? What is easily preventable?
If so, how much/well?
They seem so obviously stupid that i find it hard to believe that they do.
They seem so obviously stupid that it is hard for me to believe they do much.
I mean between adults without any injuries/disabilities.
Ok seriously how do you resolve that without resorting to snorkel
We can debate on what criterions it violates and it being worse than other alternate voting systems. Rigged choice voting? How? What party or candidate is it rigged for? Can someone explain the mechanism behind the rigging? How could it possibly be worse than how its currently rigged for 2 parties?
Dancing is so much fun. It is good exercise. It develops the skill of copying any movement you want just by looking at it. It gives you the sharingan (or at least the closest equivalent to it) which can transfer to pretty much any sport. Everyone at some point flops like a fish tryna do a new dance, but if you get past the embarrassment you end up with something awesome. Makes you practice vibing with others.
Dancing is too feminine? Breakdance you bitch.
You’re too robotic? Literally do the robot.
Like you can still use the throw to set other stuff up, but it wont count towards ippon or points even if you do finish the throw successfully. You could win by using that throw and then either pinning or submitting.
https://cdn.fugu.com/lc-59/images/curriculum/ls_00000898_01.jpg
Position im referring to is pictured in the link above
Foods yummy but dont want spills.
Got refunded so no big deal to me butt
