Some more standards

New Democracy donald at
Tue Oct 6 23:08:54 PDT 1998

Dear Bart Ingles,

You wrote:
>1. Unknown candidates lose.  There should be a way to distinguish
>between candidates who have a consensus, and those who are simply in the
>middle because the most popular candidates are also the most hated.

Donald: There is a way. Simply do not use more than one choice at a time in
the calculations. The more choices per voter that a method uses, the more
we go deeper into the swamp of the unknown.

You wrote:
>2. If "most hated" candidates are to be excluded, there should be a way
>to distinguish truly hated candidates from those who are ranked last
>merely because they compete with the voter's favorite -- in other words,
>there should be no advantage to insincerely ranking a competitor last.

Donald: If there was a "truly hated candidate", it follows that that
candidate will receive few first choices and few lower choices. This is how
a "most hated" candidate can be excluded. This is the only way candidates
should be excluded.
     We have no right to make value judgements as to which candidate are
"most hated" and then attempt to design an election method to exclude those
candidates. The election method chosen must work ten years from now. Today,
we have no way of knowing which candidates will be the "most hated" at that

Donald Davison

     ///                 N E W    D E M O C R A C Y                ///
     \\\ Home of Citizen's Democracy \\\

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list