[EM] Re: Majority Criterion

[Forest Simmons]

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Chris Benham wrote:

> When making technical comparisons between  methods that allow voters to
> fully rank the candidates and those that don't,  I  am
> strongly of  the view that the best/only way to get away from confusion
> and sophistry  is  to  consider that all the methods have as
> their input ranked ballots with an  approval cutoff.

That would be sufficient most of the time, but using dyadic ballots or CR
ballots as the "common denominator" would be even better.

Suppose that we merely have ranked ballots with an approval cutoff, and we
want to reconstruct a likely CR ballot from that information alone.

Example:


A>B>C>D>E>>F>G>H>I>J>K>L>M>N>P

Reconstructed CR values on a scale of -100 to 100:

A->100, B->80, C->60, D->40, E->20,

while the ten candidates below the approval cutoff get respective ratings
from -10 to -100 in steps of -10.

Forest