CR pairwise

[Forest Simmons]

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Roy wrote:

> Forest Simmons wrote:
> > This recent CR pairwise is meant to be simpler than Dyadic approval
> > via CR, otherwise probably inferior.
> 
> Simpler for tabulating by hand? Or how do you mean simpler? The most 
> complex part I can see is figuring out the biggest boundary crossed. 
> Is that what you're trying to overcome?
> 

Simpler for the voter to understand.

The ballots are identical to the Dyadic Approval ballots, so there is no
difference in filling out the ballots.

The scoring is simpler, requiring less sophistication on the part of the
voter.

Dyadic Approval requires the voter to understand a process of assigning
smaller weights to weaker preferences.

This new approach gives all (uneliminated) preferences equal weight.

No preferences are eliminated if there is a beats all winner.

Lacking a beats all winner, we eliminate preferences, starting from the
weakest, until there is a beats all winner.

But this last paragraph also describes the standard Dyadic Approval
completion. The only difference is that the weaker preferences have
smaller weight while they are still in effect.

Forest