DEMOREP1 at aol.com DEMOREP1 at aol.com
Mon Sep 24 14:52:35 PDT 2001

fsimmons at pcc.edu wrote in part-

Not really a margin. Take the following example:

45 A > B >> C
35 C > A >> B
20 B > C >> A

The pair strengths are ...

S({B,C})= 2*45+2*35+20 = 180
S({C,A})= 2*45+35+2*20 = 165
S({A,B})= 45+2*35+2*20 = 155

[No margins, because no subtraction]

So according to Dyadic Rated Pairs the over all ranking is

B > C > A

Despite the fact that A is the Ranked Pairs winner, the SSD winner, the
Approval Winner, the Universal Approval winner, the Dyadic Approval
winnner, the ACMA winner, and even the IRV winner.

This example is enough to get me to abandon Dyadic Rated Pairs.
-----
D- Beating the dead horse some more ----

A vote is 100 percent for or 100 percent against (with ranges in between).

Thus for one voter

A > B >> C  may mean

100 A > 99 B >> -100 C

to another voter it may mean

100 A > 51 B >> 20 C

and yet to another voter it may mean

40 A > 20 B >> -50 C

and to another voter it may mean

-5 A > -10 B >> -95 C

That is -- *relative* votes are only just that --- *relative*.

In the meantime, some rough approximations can suffice (assuming John/Mary Q.
Average Voters do not yet understand 100 to -100) -----

*Absolute votes* -- YES (above zero), NO (below zero) combined with

*Relative votes* -- 1, 2, etc.

Hairsplitting such as 100 vs. 99.999999 versus 99.999998 can wait for another
millenium.