Condorect sub-cycle rule

[David Marsay]

Mike Saari wrote:

 >Any discussion about the "right" outcome, which is missing such 
basic
> information as to which candidates are liked and disliked by a given voter,
> can go round and round but will never reach a satisfactory resolution.  Once
> the basic information is lost, there is no way to reach a reasonable
> assessment about any outcome at all.

I sympathise. However:
1. ignoring the strength of feeling still leaves an interesting 
problem.
2. although discussions on ranking methods do go round and round, I'm 
not sure that its for the reason that you give.

You raise an interesting point, but I feel there is room for 
three parrallel debates: on ranking methods, on more expressive 
methods, and on which sort of method is appropriate when.

Personally, I am interested in situations where candidates may be 
deployed tactically or voters may vote tactically. In more 
straightforward situations, I agree that one should try to get more 
'strength' information. I would even suggest using 'strength' 
information to break ranking-ties, but not as the main determinant.

Thanks.

Dave M

--------------------------------------------------
Sorry folks, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.