[EM] MCA cut off points arbitrary?
gervase at group.force9.co.uk
Thu Feb 27 17:14:35 PST 2003
> How should voters vote given that each voter would have their own
> utilities for each candidate?
One thing that I keep on forgetting is that in MCA, if no candidate has
more than half of the Favored votes, then the candidate getting the least
number of Unacceptable votes is the winner. This is the same as the
candidate who gets the most 'Favored' + 'Acceptable' votes, which is the
way MCA is usually worded.
Therefore, how to find out where the MCA cut-off would be in terms of
Utilities is easy. The candidates with utilities below 50% would get the
The Utilities are then re-calculated on the candidates that would not get
the Unacceptable votes. The candidates with utilities below 50% would get
the Acceptable votes, while those above would get the Favored votes.
I quite like Alex's use of 'Unacceptable' as the lowest level as it seems
to convey that the candidate would be given a 'Fail' mark, if each
candidate were only allowed to be given either a Pass (more than 50%) or a
Fail (less than 50%). This fits in with how to vote in MCA in terms of
The "opposite" of 'Unacceptable' is 'Acceptable'. However, 'Acceptable'
usually conveys the meaning "good enough", "satisfactory" or "OK". So,
this leaves room for 'Favored' which I think I prefer over 'Preferred'.
'Prefer' is ambiguous to me. As the voters 'prefer' the 'Acceptable'
candidates to the 'Unacceptable', adding in a 'Prefer' voting level
Also, 'Favored' is connected to the word 'Favorite', as in your favorite
candidates. However, looking at a thesaurus, 'Favor' is synonymous with
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc),
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
More information about the Election-Methods