[EM] Query for Approval advocates

[Eric Gorr]

At 12:42 AM -0700 9/1/03, Bart Ingles wrote:
>Eric Gorr wrote:
>>
>>  At 11:47 AM -0700 8/31/03, Bart Ingles wrote:
>>  >You could say that "B is obviously preferred by *majorities* of people
>>  >over every other option, but even so the "majorities" are merely
>>  >incidental.  B would be the CW without them:
>>  >
>  > >40: A
>>  >10: C>B
>>  >20: C
>>  >35: B>A
>  > >
>>  >Here B is preferred by *pluralities* of people over every other option,
>>  >but is still the CW.
>>  >
>>  >>  Now, the fact that I can point to a method that will select B is a
>>  >>  reason why I would prefer that method to a method that would select
>>  >>  something other then B.
>>  >
>>  >So do you still think the CW should win in the immediately preceding
>>  >example?
>>
>>  There is no good reason I can come up with which would indicate that
>>  B should not win as > 50% (i.e. a majority) of people in your example
>>  prefers B over both C and A.
>
>I never said that B shouldn't win, merely that B is NOT preferred by a
>majority over either A or C.  Only 45/105 prefer B to A, and only 35/105
>prefer B to C.  A majority would require 53 votes.

B *IS* preferred by a majority over both A & C

In the contest between B & A, only 85 people choose to participate. 
Of those 85, > 50% preferred B.

In the contest between B & C only 65 people choose to  participate. 
Of those 65, > 50% preferred B.

I can see no reason to count those people who had no opinion in these 
contests and elected not to participate in them. They wanted no 
voice, so they didn't get any.