[EM] Re: Truncation

[Forest Simmons]

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Forest Simmons wrote:

> Suppose that somebody comes up with a great method that requires complete
> rankings, perhaps a de-cloned version of the Kemeny Order.
>
> Here's a suggestion for a convention on filling in the truncated ballots:
>
> Automatically rank the truncated candidates according to the candidate
> card published by the highest ranked candidate on the ballot.
>
> So if a ballot comes in as A>B>C=D, and candidate A's published preference
> order is A>D>C>B, then the ballot is completed as A>B>D>C.
>
> A more complicated example:
>
> Let's say a ballot comes in as A=B>C=D, and the published preferences of
> candidates A and B are A>B>C>D and B>A>C>D, respectively.
>
> Then it is clear that C=D should be replaced with C>D, but how about the
> A=B?
>
> We consult C's published preference order C>B>A>D, to break the tie.
>
> The result is B>A>C>D.
>

If we could come up with a satisfactory convention on filling in
indifferent ballot preferences, then the margins/winning votes controversy
would become moot.

Forest