[EM] Majority Choice Approval and Bucklin
Adam Haas Tarr
atarr at ecn.purdue.edu
Tue Feb 25 14:28:22 PST 2003
>> 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.
>>
>> -Adam
>
>Forest suggested a Modified Bucklin method in messages 8390 and 8391 from
>Yahoo Groups.
Thanks for the link. The major difference here is that rather than
checking for a majority of votes of votes above a certain level, Forest's
proposal looks for a fraction greater than 1/N, where N is the number of
candidates. I don't like this idea, since it makes the method sensitive to
the number of candidates. This causes the method to fail
clone-independence, among other things. Sticking to a majority as the
cutoff seems simple and effective.
-Adam
----
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