demexp-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Demexp-dev] A simple path for delegation


From: Felix HENRY
Subject: Re: [Demexp-dev] A simple path for delegation
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:04:30 +0100



> If Yes I don't understand what
> happens when
> someone who has delegated his vote recieves a delegation on the same
> question.

I did not thought at this issue. :-)

But the answer is quite simple : we *know* that the participant who
receives a delegation has delegated his vote and to whom, so we simply
follow the delegation chain and add the vote to the correct delegate.

Ok

However, should we store the original delegated participant, or the
final delegate after applying closure on the delegation graph of this
question? I don't know.

I don't think you can store only the final delegate because if anyone in the chain changes its delegation one would miss it. If one stores only the original delegated participant, one can follow the chain to obtain the final vote.
However, I don't know how to cope with the situation when someone in the
delegation chain changes its vote.

A possible approach require to maintain a structure of the delegations. You then
need two functions. One function computes the voting position of a user (it uses
either his own vote of it computes the position of the person at the end of the
delegation chain). The second function detects who is affected when a person changes is delegate vote/delegate person. Thus, when a person changes his delegate vote/delegate person , all those affected have their vote re-computed by calling the first function.

The data structure is simple but very big: for each question Q, and for each person P, it contains the list of persons who have delegated to P on Q...

Does this make sense?

  Félix


It is probably much easier and simpler to
store the final delegate. And thus the delegator would know that his
chosen delegate has himself delegated to another person. But, on the
other side, it would be much more exact to store the exact choice of
the delegator, in case the chosen delegate changes his mind.

And this raises the question of which information to return when the
server is asked about the delegate: information about the wanted
delegated? or the effective delegate?

I need to think about this issue. Good spot Félix! :-)

Best wishes,
d.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]