[EM] Re: Majority? Expressivity? Strategy?

DEMOREP1 at aol.com DEMOREP1 at aol.com
Sat Mar 31 19:50:39 PST 2001

```> For the benefit of newer folks ---  I again suggest that only YES majority
> (above zero utility) choices get elected to executive and judicial offices.

Mr. Moore wrote in part-

What do you mean, "above zero utility"? What are the upper and lower bounds
of utility? Many on this list use a utility range from 0 to 10, or from 0 to
100,
so which candidates have "below zero utility"? Or perhaps you mean one of
the following: above midrange, above mean, or above median. Note that
utilities are very personal -- some voters have more at stake than others,
yet most will place their favorite and least favorite at the extreme ends of
the scale. What weighting scheme would you use to average such disparate
ratings?

D- Absolute values- plus 100 percent (YES - above zero) to minus 100 percent
(NO- below zero).

Since some (rather high ???) percentage of the voters have math problems with
negative numbers, the range, of course, may be 100 to 0 with an above/below
50 for YES/NO.

I mention again - there is no way to do an average that is useful.

2 A (2) B (1)
1 B (100) A (-100)

Sorry , B loses.

2 A (100) B (99)
1 B (100) A(-100)

Sorry again, B still loses.

2 A (52) B (51)
1 B (100) A (-100)

Sorry yet again, B still loses.

What to be avoided is

2 A (-99) B (-100)
1 B (100)

Currently in the U.S.A. a whole lot of elections have winners with below zero
(or below 50 percent) absolute ratings which is why I suggest simple YES or
NO votes on candidates for the same reason that there are simple YES or NO
votes on ballot issues in many State and local elections in the U.S.A.

Having ratings would perhaps cause *some* elected politicians to observe that
NOT all of the votes for them are 100 rating votes (but a whole lot may be in
the 60 to 40 (or lower) range --  on a 100 to 0 scale).

```