[EM] 1-person-1-vote has been abandoned?

[Alex Small]

Dave Ketchum said:
> One condition I would apply to methods - a method too complex for many
> voters to understand should properly be rejected for this defect.
>
> This rule clearly accepts Plurality, Approval, and Condorcet.

Um, I wouldn't say that all Condorcet completion methods pass this rule. 
Cursory reading of some descriptions has left me a little confused.  Sure,
if I sat down and thought it thru I would understand it.  Still, I suspect
the public would deem many Condorcet completion methods too complicated to
bother with (which is not the same as too complicated to understand when
people have finite time and even more finite interest).

> IRV might be open to debate for the possibility of strategic voting - and
> that perhaps being considered to be too hard to understand.

The basic mechanics of IRV are quite easy to understand.  The strategic
issues can certainly require a little more attention to understand.

However, the endless debates on this list over some aspects of Condorcet
completion methods suggest to me that the public will deem some of those
issues too complicated to bother with.

Finally, as I've said before, until Condorcet advocates reach a consensus
over the proper method of resolving cycles, Condorcet doesn't stand a
chance in any sort of public debate.  The various rated methods (Approval,
CR, Majority Choice Approval, and Proxy Approval) stand a much better
chance because of their simplicity and relative lack of paradoxes.



Alex


----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em