[EM] The only strategy an Approval voter needs to know:

[Alex Small]

Stephane Rouillon said:
> CR is the last method I included in my rankings.
> Maybe I do not know everything about it.

CR is simple, in fact, Approval is a special case of CR.

You can give each candidates how ever many points you want on some scale. 
The scale can be 0 to 4, 0 to 10, whatever.  Approval is the simplest case
where it's 0 to 1.  This isn't ranking, because you can give equal scores.
 Approval actually requires you to give equal scores if there's more than
2 candidates.

Many people say CR is equivalent to Approval because if you want to help
elect a candidate you should give him as much support as possible (maximum
score).  If you don't want to help elect a candidate you should give as
little support as possible (score of zero).  I'm not 100% convinced that
this is always the best way to go (zero or full score for each candidate,
nothing in between) but I do agree that it's usually a very good strategy.

Since CR tends to encourage the same type of voting as Approval, and since
it gives more flexibility to those voters who want to vote in some manner
other than all-or-nothing (give every candidate either maximum points or
no points), I rate CR just above Approval.

> Approval and Borda seemed to handle clones better than CR that
> splits a voter weight in my eye.

No.  Borda is more easily manipulable by clones.  CR is immune to clones.

Maybe you're confusing CR with cumulative voting for single-winner races. 
Say, give each voter N votes to distribute among candidates however he
wishes.  The candidate with the most votes wins.  CR stands for Cardinal
Ratings, not cumulative voting.



Alex