Changes

My alternative definition for populations is either:

My alternative definition for populations is either:

* '''Liberals/Population''', the obvious choice. Ranges from 0 to 1. Choose an suitable transformation, such as x-> tan(x*pi/2) if you want it to range over [zero,infinity]. Or the negative logarithm, to whatever base you like. Would make it behave like pH, or scale of Richter

* '''Liberals/Population''', the obvious choice. Ranges from 0 to 1. Choose an suitable transformation, such as x-> tan(x*pi/2) if you want it to range over [zero,infinity]. Or take the negative logarithm of (1-Liberals/Population), to whatever base you like. Would make it behave like pH, or scale of Richter

* '''Liberals/(Population-Liberal)''', the second obvious choice. Maps naturally from zero to infinity.

* '''Liberals/(Population-Liberal)''', the second obvious choice. Maps naturally from zero to infinity.

* Funny, your idea that moderates do not matter. So if you have in a group only 99 moderates, and one Liberal, it would be as Liberal, as if it had 100 Liberals, and no moderates?  

* Funny, your idea that moderates do not matter. So if you have in a group only 99 moderates, and one Liberal, it would be as Liberal, as if it had 100 Liberals, and no moderates?