[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.


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