[EM] Possible advantage of NES (& maybe DSV) over wv with AERLO

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

The automatic equal ranking line option (AERLO) of course only gives its 
protection to the above-line candidates. And so if NES &/or DSV, in one of 
their versions that I've listed,  can give that same protection naturally, 
intrinsicallly, without AERLO, then, with NES, that protection extends to 
all candidates.

So NES & maybe DSV may well be in that way be somewhat  better than wv with 
AERLO.

Of course the voter who considers merit differences within 2 sets negligible 
compared to the merit difference between those 2 sets doesn't need universal 
equal ranking protection--s/he only needs it for that particular set, the 
better set.

Still, universal intrinsic equal ranking protection would be a good thing 
for any voter.

DSV & NES flexibly find the voter's best way of voting in the base method. 
There's something ideally promising about that. If, in any outcome, there's 
a way that you can improve on it, then it isn't a Nash equilibrium. So NES 
chooses a candidate whose win is an outcome that you couldn't improve on by 
voting differently.

In that way, DSV & NES seem to be the best that can be achieved.

That's why it says something for wv that their properties seem to be much 
like those of wv.

I should add that NES's natural intrinsic universal equal-ranking protection 
also applies to equal ranking as a defensive strategy against offensive 
order-reversal. But, as I was saying in my long anti-order-reversal reply,
the symmetrical situation caused by offensive order-reversal could have 
everyone in the cycle doing that upranking, making a tie that would go to 
the Approval cutoffs. If the offensive order-reversers chose the right time 
for their order-reversal, when their candidate can win that tiebreaker, then 
the offensive order-reversal coud succeed.

In NES, one anti-order-reversal strategy would be the use of an option for 
the automatic refusal of equal ranking protection under specified 
conditions. But ordinary manually-voted defensive truncation works too, in 
NES and in DSV. Likewise, the automatic dropping line option would work in 
NES or DSV, though, as I was saying, the desirability of adding that to 
AERLO is questionable.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Stay informed on Election 2004 and the race to Super Tuesday. 
http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx