Exaggerated opinions

[Saari]

Mike:
>> Ranked votes (i.e. first, second, third) of ANY sort, regardless
>> of the scoring method being used, necessarily involve a
>> dictatorial ballot-creating function.

Markus:
>Your comments are irrelevant because of ...
>There is absolutely no reason, why the ballot-creation should
>be more dictatorial for a ranked vote than for a rated
>vote.

In a rated vote (where a distinct "opinion" is expressed for every
possibility), it is possible to conduct the decision process with a method
where each alternative is proposed and voted on independently.  (Assume this
is done in parallel, meaning that a variety of proposals/alternatives can be
pending simultaneously.)  This means that new alternatives can be conceived
and proposed ad hoc by the members on an as-needed basis.  This method is non-
dictatorial because all new alternatives can appear whenever desired by any
given member (subject to any other existing rules regarding new proposals -
assume that such rules apply equally to all members).

In contrast, in a ranked vote ( where alternatives are ordered first, second,
third, etc.) it is necessary to compile a "final list of alternatives" before
any voting can occur.  The creation and presentation of the "final list" must
necessarily be performed by a subcommittee duly authorized to perform this
task.  I am unaware of any method involving ranked voting which does not also
necessarily involve the dictatorial pre-step of creating the "final list" (and
establishing an "official polling date/time").  Perhaps there is a method I am
not aware of?

Mike Saari