[EM] Portuguese dictator should be the greatest portuguese?

[David Cary]

Welcome to the Electorama list.

  -- Even without Chicago style voting (vote early, vote often) in
this phone poll, the small response rate (about 1.5% of the
population) and rumors about two polarizing front runners made the
results especially sensitive to sample/participation bias.  That
effect would probably bias the results for just about any election
method.
  -- Depending on the insightfulness of your friends, your estimates
are probably a closer approximation to what a random sample poll
would produce.
  -- To the extent that creating a participation bias resembles the
behavior of honey bees, some might argue this poll was really a form
of range voting.  However, I think the honey bee example confuses
political activism/campaigning with voting.
  -- The debates, sometimes heated and emotional, about which is the
best election method have morphed into debates, sometimes heated and
emotional, about which is the most important election criterion. 
Arguably, this represents some measure of progress.
  -- There is no best election method.  Preferences for various
election methods ultimately are a matter of personal preference,
which may be situational.
  -- There is no best election method criteria.  Preferences for
various criteria ultimately are a matter of personal preferences,
which may be situational.  Criteria do sometimes highlight meaningful
differences between various election methods, but there is also
sometimes an element of inventing or reinterpreting criteria to prove
one's favorite election method really is best.
  -- I've offered some critiques of the basis for Bayesian Regret as
used in IEVS as an election method criteria / evaluation measure. 
Look at the some of my postings and related threads in the EM
archives during the last month or two if you are interested. 
Likewise there are good critiques of using Condorcet winners as a
election method criteria / evaluation measure.  See the preceding
item.
  -- IEVS evaluation of strategy comparisons is weak, in part because
the strategies IEVS uses vary significantly in how optimum they are
for various election methods.  A meaningful comparison would also
have to consider other factors as well such as what kind of
information is available, how much cooperation there is within groups
of individuals that prefer a given outcome, what the risks are of
using a given strategy, and what are the costs and benefits, other
than the election result, for using a given strategy.  I'm not aware
of any decent attempts to create a good framework for such
comparisons.
  -- The contest using plurality voting was probably considered a
great publicity / propaganda success from RTP's perspective.  Any
popular attention on which dead king, poet, explorer/colonialist (or
here in the US, which emerging entertainer, celebrity wannabe dancer,
or tropical island castaway) is/was best, is popular attention
directed away from what the politicians are doing.  In that regard,
television in many modern societies has, I suppose, largely replaced
religion.
  -- If it motivates even just a few people to become interested in
and better informed about the available election methods, there may
come some good from it after all.

-- David Cary



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate 
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367