[EM] Kevin, you wrote on 4 Oct '03

[Dave Ketchum]

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 07:25:12 +0200 (CEST) Kevin Venzke wrote:

> Dave,
> 
>  --- Dave Ketchum <davek at clarityconnect.com> a écrit : 
> 
>>>  * If each rank receives one half, then the results of the election will
>>>be the same as if you ranked any one of the two as first and the other
>>>second, so, in which case splitting your vote is not necessary, it merely
>>>makes the math of the method more complicated.
>>>
>>Here if Tom and Dick each vote A=B, we get to the same destination as for 
>>votes of A>B and B>A.  I see this scoring as reasonable.
>>

Let's do it slowly:

Each voter has the right to apply ONE vote toward ONE candidate (the 
candidate which is the voter's first choice at the moment).

Some voters will be doing exactly this.

Tom and Dick each want to apply equal preference to A and to B.

By counting half a vote each for Tom's support for A and for B, he is 
applying as much power as other voters are allowed to apply when they are 
not doing equals.

I thought this would come thru clearer by noting that Tom and Dick each 
voting A=B, should and would have the same power as for them to get 
together and have one vote A>B while the other votes B>A.

> 
> I see this scoring as undesirable, because by tying too many candidates in first,
> one can cause one or more of them to be eliminated.


I make no sense of this, for the whole point to the election is to 
eliminate all but one winning candidate.

Back to the point.
      In basic IRV each voter is applying one unit of power to helping 
elect one candidate.
      In this extension the voters using it are helping two candidates, 
and therefore should be giving each half as much help (and, if you allow 
A=B=C, then the power should be 1/3 for each

> 
> The point of allowing equal ranking in IRV, is to make it always safe to vote
> without order reversal.
> 
> 
>>>  * But, I suspect that you may mean to give each rank a full vote, both of
>>>which will be included in the first count.  In which case I do not support
>>>equal-ranking, for it is merely a complicated mix of Approval Voting and
>>>Irving.
>>>
>>Here if Tom votes A=B, he has as much power as if he became twins, voting 
>>A>B and B>A, giving these two an edge over other candidates.
>>
> 
> This is not really so, since all voters can do this.  And if the other voters
> bullet vote, they are denying more candidates votes as surely as Tom as giving
> more of them votes.  That is no different from Approval, I don't think.


True that all voters could do equals, and thus have equal power.  My point 
is that voter power should be equal when some are rating their first 
choice candidates equal and others are not.

A voter ranking less than all the candidates, up to and including bullet 
voting, has no effect on their power in IRV until/unless all of the 
candidates they rank lose, at which time they drop out of the remainder of 
the election.

We are still not going near Approval, for that only hears do vs don't 
approve.  With ranking we can say best, almost best, etc.


> 
> 
> Kevin Venzke
> stepjak at yahoo.fr

-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.