[EM] Re: margins axiom

[Steve Eppley]

Hi,
Chris Benham asked:
> Steve, you wrote (Fri.Jun.18):
>> There is a possible compromise between margins and 
>> majorities (but I prefer straight majorities, not 
>> this compromise):  
>>   If the voter leaves two candidates unranked, 
>>   don't count that as a half vote for each, count it 
>>   as zero for each.  But if the voter explicitly ranks 
>>   two candidates as equal, count that as a half vote 
>>   for each.  
-snip- 
> CB: In reference to the phrase "if the voter explicitly 
> ranks two candidates equal", does that include "equal
> last"?

Take your pick, there's room for more than one compromise 
proposal.  What I've proposed, however, is to count as 
zero only when the two candidates are omitted (truncated) 
from the voter's ordering.  So, yes, if the voter ranks two 
candidates equally last (which implies she didn't truncate, 
in the sense that I'm using the term) then my proposal is 
to count that as a half vote for each, in their pairing.

This would add a constraint on the user interface in the 
voting "booth": There must be a way for the voter to omit 
candidates from her ordering.  Or the equivalent, allowing 
the voter to somehow indicate which indifferences are 
to be counted as zero points for each in their pairing. 
Which we may as well call another compromise proposal, 
since it's more general.  Since I favor majorities, not 
margins, I'd want the default to be that an indifference 
is to be counted as zero points for each in their pairing 
unless the voter indicates it should be counted as a half 
point for each.

--Steve