[EM] Linear Spread Median Range Voting

[rob brown]

I like this way better than "regular" range voting, as it removes a large
part of the incentive people have to vote insincerely.

Still, a voter has to take a guess as to what vote will be most effective in
helping to achieve what he wants.  Example:  I vote A: 0, B: 55, C: 100.

Then the final score comes out to be A: 56.001, B: 56, C: 45.

Oops, my vote of 55 for B actually lowered his score, and in this very tight
race may have actually cost him the election.  My A and B votes effectively
cancelled themselves out in the A-B race, even though I much prefer B and
would have liked to help him.  If I had watched the polls more closely, I
would have given B a higher score (anything over 57 would have done it),
since C turned out to be irrelevant anyway.

Personally, I will never get behind a method that gives a significant
advantage to those voters that are better at guessing who is likely to win,
and this method does that (as does approval).  People should only need to
learn about candidates, not have to fill their brains with strategy and
polling data, IMO.

Anyway, if you are gonna have Range voting, this way of figuring it is a
huge improvement in my opinion.  The linear spread thing seems to be a
simple solution to the likelihood of ties problem.  Don't like it, but
dislike it less. :)

-rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20051220/c3f2dedd/attachment-0003.htm>