Pairwise Rated Benchmarks
bartman at netgate.net
Thu Jun 10 21:40:38 PDT 1999
DEMOREP1 at aol.com wrote:
> Mr. Ingles wrote in part--
> A. SINCERE SCENARIO:
> 1.00 .90 .10 0
> 45 A B C
> 15 B C A
> 40 C B A
> D- How many times must I repeat myself ? -- There will be polls whatever
> method is being used.
> A choice either gets majority acceptability or it does not (i.e. the same as
> in voting on legislative issues as in voting for executive/ judicial
> Whatever method is used, minority choices (and their supporters) will attempt
> to strategize to defeat some choice based on such polls (with their counter-
> strategizing conspiratorial/ evasive/ lying voters).
> A single winner election method will thus operate on the votes as cast (not
> on an infinite number of replayed strategized votes) to produce "a" winner
> (who is thus the "right"/"correct" winner).
Again, I only proposed the rated benchmark for use with hypothetical
scenarios, in order to find a way of saying "given these sincere
preferences, which candidate SHOULD win?" Of course, in real life there
is no such thing as sincere votes, all election results are influenced
> As to the scenario, only C has the acceptability of a majority of the voters
> above 0.50. C should win (without having to do the other math).
At least we agree on who should win in the above scenario, if not on
why. I note that of the widely known methods, only IRO and Approval
(and possibly Bucklin) advocates would agree with us in this situation.
More information about the Election-Methods