[EM] Cycles in sincere individual preferencesandapplication to vote-collection

[Paul Kislanko]

" Give one vote for the top candidate(s) over every lower candidate(s).
Scratch off the top candidate(s)
repeat until the ballot is exhausted.

What else is there to prove...?"

Well, not sure what you "proved", but as you described it either you elected
the losing-est candidate or you said Borda was right.

-----Original Message-----
From: election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com] On Behalf Of
Adam Tarr
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 1:51 PM
To: election-methods at electorama.com
Subject: RE: [EM] Cycles in sincere individual preferencesandapplication to
vote-collection 

I'm not sure why this was put in as a second message, but anyway...

Paul Kislanko wrote:

>If you do not believe an individual should be allowed to think, you should 
>not be worried about voting methods.

I certainly don't have a problem with folks having whatever opinions they 
like.  But social choice algorithms are (excepting cases of unanimity) 
about overruling some people's opinions.  I would start by overruling the 
opinions of those whose opinions are self-contradictory.

>I gave an example of how an individual might sincerely have different 
>pariwise rankins that cannot be inferred from a single ranked ballot.

And I disputed its reasonable-ness.

>Now PROVE that an individual s pairwise preferences can be inferred from a 
>ranked ballot. And I don t understand it is not a proof.

Give one vote for the top candidate(s) over every lower candidate(s).
Scratch off the top candidate(s)
repeat until the ballot is exhausted.

What else is there to prove...?

----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info