[EM] justified criticism, higher/lower

[Anthony Duff]

This is an example of where expert jargon is counter-intuitive to a
beginner.

If a completed ranked ballot looks like this:

Candiate    Rank
A           2
B           3
C           1
D           4

We tend to loosely say that "C is ranked 'higher' than B" which is
counter-intuitive because the number 1 is 'lower' than the number 3.

Anthony


 --- Craig Carey <research at ijs.co.nz> wrote: 
> 
> Here is the definition of Monotonicity of Mr G-A:
> 
> | 5. Monotonicity: If candidate A wins with certainty according to
> a set
> | of ballots, and some of the ballots are subsequently changed only
> in
> | that A is ranked and/or rated higher on those ballots, then A
> should
> | still win with certainty.
> 
> Compare that with the wordign of Mr Schulze's Voting Matters 17
> article:
> 
> 
> } 5.2 Monotonicity
> }
> } Monotonicity says that when some voters rank candidate A higher
> without
> } changing the order in which they rank the other candidates
> relatively
> } to each other then the probability that candidate A is elected
> must not
> } decrease.
> }
> } The Schulze method meets monotonicity.
> 
> Clearly that is too wrong to be acceptable since:
> 
> (1) Both use the word "higher" to mean 'lower'.


Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com