[EM] Methods, and the criteria they satisfy

[Alex Small]

Diana Galletly said:
> There may (fingers crossed) be an opportunity for some analysis with
> data from real elections (see the last two tables on
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/results.pdf for the
> elections I really want to analyse) -- I've been accused of using
> contrived examples to make points, and I suspect these elections of
> giving real-life examples of problems.  If it does get to the point of
> my getting the raw data, I'll be very happy to test any method around to
> see what results would be obtained in these two cases.


In your original post yesterday I believe you said you were intereted in
referenda.  In the US, referenda usually refer to yes/no questions on a
proposed law.  Are there multi-option referenda in the UK, or do you mean
something else?

If you're looking for a real-world single-winner election with 10
candidates and ranked ballots, a private group in the US is in the process
of conducting one right now.  A group of libertarian activists have
decided that, since a 3rd party can't win easily in a place that uses
plurality voting and single member districts, they'll concentrate all of
their efforts on a single small state.  Their goal is to move 20,000
activists to that one state.  I'm not involved (and I don't plan to get
involved), but I have a friend who is.

Anyway, although the plan is somewhat loony, they're holding an
interesting election.  The 5,000 current members are voting on which state
to move to (once they get another 15,000 members).  There are 10 candidate
states, nominated primarily for their population (although 2 small states
were deemed unsuitable for political reasons).  They're using Condorcet.

Supposedly a detailed listing of election data will be posted on the web
October 1 when the winner is announced.  All of us on this list will get
to have fun going through the data with a fine-tooth comb to try and
defend whatever theories we subscribe to in regard to election methods.



Alex