[EM] To Marquette, to Marquette ...

[Forest Simmons]

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Steve Barney wrote:

...

> BTW, one reason given in a news article for dropping Nanson's Method and
> reverting back to the plurality with a runoff was that they preferred voting
> twice, and felt that they could be more informed voters the second time
> around. What to do about that?
>

Smart voters!  They recognized that with Nanson you need accurate
probabilities to know how to vote in your own best interest.  [Nanson's
optimum strategy is more likely to require insincere order than you would
need to use in SSD or Ranked Pairs.]

What to do about that?  Use a Condorcet method that is not so dependent on
the polls, or use a cheaper but robust method like Approval or Majority
Choice Approval that gives good results with or without polls.

Forest

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em