[EM] Typo in "Relevance of Consistency"

MIKE OSSIPOFF nkklrp at hotmail.com
Sun Nov 3 22:41:02 PST 2002

In my recent posting, "Relevance of Consistency", at the end of
that message, when I said "easily enacted", I meant to say
"easily implemented". No new ballot is needed. No new balloting
equipment is needed. Where the ballot now says "Vote for 1", it
would instead say "Vote fof 1 or more".

What makes Approval so easy to propose is that it's merely our
old Plurality, but with one small but powerful difference: The
voter is the one who decides how many candidates s/he wants to rate
with a 1 instead of a zero. Plurality has the peculiar requirement
that the voter only give a point to one candidate. That asymmetry
of Plurality is the reason why Plurality can cause different
voters' voting power to differ by a much greater ratio than is
found in Approval, if voting power is defined, in a particular
election, for a particular voter, as his/her power to improve
his/her expectation by his/her ballot.

Unlike Approval, Instant Runoff is a completely new voting system,
with an expensive new balloting system.

Mike Ossipoff

Broadband? Dial-up? Get reliable MSN Internet Access. 

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

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list