The "Turkey" problem (Re: [EM] 2-rank and N-rank Condorcet)

[Kevin Venzke]

Rob and Josh,

Providing a number of ranks comparable to what would make people comfortable
is a reasonable idea, but with 5 or 7 ranks I believe the Approval-style
benefits would be lost.  I like Forest's idea of sqr(candidates) ranks.

I think you should have fewer ranks than the number of candidates with
a serious chance of winning.  That forces every voter to indicate at least
one "serious" contest that is less important to them than the others.
I think three or four ranks would usually be ideal.

Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr

 --- josh at narins.net a écrit : 
> On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 03:07:33PM -0700, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > Very interesting.  I guess my criticism was based on not fully 
> > understanding N-rank Condorcet myself.  I've gone back and read the 
> > discussion, and I'm much more intrigued.
> > 
> > Rather than having a formula to determine the number of ranks, my sense 
> > is that N should be chosen based on what people are used to.  I'd 
> > recommend N=5, if only because it lends itself to this familiar format:
> > 
> >       Strongly                    Strongly
> >       disapprove     Neutral       approve
> > Joan   (1)     (2)      (3)     (4)     (5)
> > Jane   (1)     (2)      (3)     (4)     (5)
> > Jack   (1)     (2)      (3)     (4)     (5)
> 
> The Social Sciences have repeatedly held that people most prefer 7.
> 
> Agree strongly
> Agree
> Agree weakly
> Neutral
> Disagree weakly
> Disagree
> Disagree strongly
> 
> 
> I read it again just recently, somewhere.
> 


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