[EM] Majority Choice Approval and Bucklin

Venzke Kevin stepjak at yahoo.fr
Wed Feb 19 22:49:58 PST 2003

It occurs to me that on any stage of evaluation, more
than one candidate could have a "majority."  That
makes it seem a little arbitrary to have to say, "If
someone has a majority *and* it's the largest
majority, stop processing."  Also, since the
majorities could overlap, it is more obviously
artificial than an IRV majority.

Just thoughts.


 --- Adam Tarr <atarr at purdue.edu> a écrit : >
Something I've been wondering about... has anyone
> suggested extending the 
> gradation in MCA beyond preferred, approved, and
> diapproved?  For example, 
> why not use MCA with a A,B,C,D,F ballot?  If no
> candidate has a majority of 
> A's, then check for a majority of A's and B's, then
> check for a majority of 
> A's, B's, and C's, and finally just elect the
> candidate with the most A's, 
> B's, C's, and D's.
> It seems like an obvious point, but I haven't
> actually seen any messages 
> advocating it.  Call it "extended MCA" or
> "unconstrained Bucklin" or 
> "Approval Bucklin" or "Bucklin done right" or
> "bubble up approval" or whatever.

Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

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