[EM] Reward oiffensive truncation to avoid order-reversal? :-)

[Stephane Rouillon]

This is exactly the point.
For Mike it is obvious, that burying-strategy is riskier.
For me, offensive truncation can be as much dangerous.

Yes burying as a double weight compared and it should hurt
more when your strategy comes back right against your favorite,
but it is easier to predict, because usually burying is done on
the first preferences, only when it is safe.

Truncation on the other hand, is a matter of middle ranks. Thus it is "less"
damageable if your sixth preference gets elected because you truncated your
fifth
and it would have won, but it is likely to happen a lot more often!

Mike's social utility function puts most of the weight over firsts
preferences.
In that case, is logic is good. Yet, everything is a matter of proportions.
IMHO, an exhaustive analysis is needed.

Steph

MIKE OSSIPOFF a écrit :

> Steph--
>
> You wrote:
>
> Although, as Blake argued, it seems winning votes could increase
> the tendancy of using a burying-strategy instead to achieve the same goal.
>
> I reply:
>
> ...and we wouldn't want to put them to the trouble of risky offensive
> order-reversal.
>
> Well, no one can say that you aren't considerate.
>
> Leave your car door unlocked, so that when someone steals your car radio
> they won't have toi break the car's window.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info