[EM] election-methods Digest, Vol 18, Issue 7

[Warren Smith]

no my "prefeence" for utility does NOT trace to my "belief that many voters
will be sincere."  (Venzke delusion about me.)  It also does NOT arise
from the idea that voters who want to downweight their votes, can do so,
thus leading to better utility election results (although that undoubtably is
generally true).

Because: in my computer simulations & comparisons of different voting systems,
voters were allowed to be strategic & insincere, and range votign had
the best utility under those circumstances even with 100% strategic voters.

And because: in my computer sims, nobody downweighted themselves - all voters
voted 100 for their favorite and 0 for their most hated.  Always.

So venzke & gilmour are completely wrong about my views and motivations.
In fact, though, were Gilmour to add in intentional downweighting to the
simulation, then utlity would get even better, giving range voting
even more of an advantage over other voting systems in whic such
downweighting is not possible.  

wds