[EM] Query for one and all
John B. Hodges
jbhodges at usit.net
Mon Sep 1 03:08:02 PDT 2003
Consider the following single-winner method. Voters submit ranked
ballots, ties allowed, truncation allowed. (Only one vote allowed for
each candidate.) First-choice votes are tallied; if anyone gets a
majority, the one with the largest tally wins. If no one gets a
majority of first-chioce votes, then second-choice votes are tallied
and added to the first-choice votes. Again, if anyone has received
votes from a majority of the ballots, the candidate with the largest
total wins. And so forth, for as many ranks as there are, until
someone gets votes from a majority of ballots. If all ballots become
exhausted and still nobody has received votes from a majority of
ballots, then the candidate with the largest total wins.
This method has been called "Generalized Bucklin", and AFAICT could
also be called "Majority Choice Approval".
My question, for one and all: Is there any desirable quality, that
any single-winner method has, that this method does not have?
One likely answer is "Condorcet-efficiency"; this method does not
seek directly to find the Condorcet-winner. Merrill's simulations
found plain Approval to have good levels of c-e but not 100%.
Chris Benham has found something called the "bogey-candidate" effect.
Add that to the list.
So, please, all chip in: what do you know that's bad, about Majority
Choice Approval?
--
----------------------------------
John B. Hodges, jbhodges@ @usit.net
Do Justice, Love Mercy, and Be Irreverent.
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list