Responses to some of Forest's ideas

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/17/01 1:50:00 PM, Forest wrote:

Here's an example of this (zero info):

45 A >> B > C
45 C >> B > A
2  C > A >> B
4  B > A >> C
4  B > C >> A

B is the low utility CW that gets eliminated, having only 8 percent
approval. Demorep's method gives C the win because it is the CW among the
candidates satisfying the minimum approval standard. 

Does it bother you that after the results are announced, the first faction
(A's supporters) might regret not having (insincerely) approved B ?

---
D- The 2  C > A >> B voters might regret that they could have voted 2 C >> A 
> B (since such 2 votes would allow A to get a YES majority).

As usual, I note the difference between *absolute* and *relative* support.

45 A >> B > C
45 C >> B > A
2  C > A >> B
4  B > A >> C
4  B > C >> A

I have repeated suggested having a YES/NO vote first (to get Majority YES 
*tolerable* choices) and THEN do the head to head math (among such 
*tolerable* choices).

If so in the example, then

     YES
A  51
B    8  Loses
C  51

Head to Head
49     A     C   51
 C Wins

Again- by definition a majority is more than a minority such that there is a 
tilt/ imbalance towards the majority.

Forest well knows that with 3 or more choices, ALL sorts of sincere/insincere 
games can and will be played.    The election results are based on the votes 
cast.  There is always the next election for more game playing.

If only the first choice votes are used (which are presumed to be *sincere*), 
then there is 

A 45
B  8
C 47

100

Who has a YES majority ??? --- obviously none of them.

Thus, ANY second choice may or may not be *sincere*.(on the *absolute* scale).

Obviously in a real election with pre-election polls the A and C candidates 
would both try to get the *balance of power* B voters to vote only for A or C 
as a second choice.

That is --

A needs 6 of the 8 B votes to get 51
C needs 4 of the 8 B votes to get 51

If NO choice has a majority YES and is thus *tolerable*, then there should be 
a new election (or an appointment by a p.r. majority rule legislative body to 
fill the vacancy in the case of an executive or judicial office).