[EM] Re: Is range voting the panacea we need?

[Chris Benham]

Florian Legyel asked me (Sat.Jan1):

>What is the sensible and fair argument linking the minimization of
>Bayesian regret by range voting with the emotional states of voters? 
>
CB: I  could perhaps have omitted the word  "Bayesian", because that 
just refers to "averaged over a vast number of
randomized elections".

 Ok, suppose there are two candidates  and three voters, and the voting 
method is Range Voting
using the scale 0-100. All three voters are completely sincere.

Voters 1 and 2  both prefer candidate A to candidate B, but not by much 
and they are not very impressed by either. They
vote  A27, B25.   Voter 3, on the other hand,  is infatuated  with B and 
thinks that A is by comparison terrible, so votes
A2, B98.  This is how W.D Smith measures "regret" in his simulations.
 
Range Voting would just add up the points and elect B, minimizing 
"regret". Voter 3 over-ruled the other two voters, by
being more emotional. "Regret" is an emotion, isn't it?  Voter 3's 
greater  self-quantified  potential "regretfulness" (96 points
of it)  over-ruled the other two voters'  total of  4 points of 
potential regret.

That is why I say that the assertion by Range Voter advocates that 
 "minimizing...regret" is more important than majority
rule is tantamount to saying that more emotional voters should have more 
power than less emotional voters.

Chris Benham