[EM] Markus, 2 March, 1349 GMT

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

My FBC definition was quoted:

FBC:
>By voting a less-liked candidate over his/her favorite,
>a voter should never gain an outcome that he/she likes
>better than every outcome that he/she could get without
>voting a less-liked candidate over his/her favorite.

I comment:

For claritly, I´d to add something:

FBC:

There should never be a configuration of other people´s votes such that, by 
voting a less-liked candidate over his/her favorite, a voter can gain an 
outcome that s/he prefers to every outcome that s/he could get in that 
election without voting a less/liked candidate over his/her favorite.

[end of FBC definition of 2 March ´05]

But, to emphasize better the purpose of FBC, it might be better to say:

FBC:

For any configuration of candidates and  voters and for any particular one 
of those voters, there should never be a possible configuration of other 
voters´s votes such that that particular voter can achieve his/her best 
outcome only by voting a less-liked candidate over his/her favorite.

A voter´s best outcome, with respect to a particular configuration of 
candidates, voters, and other people´s votes, is an outcome that s/he 
prefers to every one of the other outcomes that s/he could get, with that 
configuration of candidates, voters, and other voters´s votes.

[end of FBC definition of 2 March, ´05, #2]

Yes, that definition is what I now mean by FBC. When I update the website, 
that will be the FBC definition there, unless the website owner objects.

Markus said:

Suppose your sincere preference is A>B>C>D>E. Suppose in
situation #1,

I reply:

What do you mean by "situation"? Does your meaning for that term include the 
votes as well as the candidates, voters, and voters´preferences? And, as 
regards FBC, talking about who wins doesn´t mean much unless you´re saying 
whether or not the voter can get his/her best possible result
without voting a less-liked candidate over his/her favorite.

Markus continues:

candidate A is elected with a probability of
60% and candidate B with a probability of 40%. Suppose in
situation #2, candidate A is elected with a probability of
70%, candidate B with a probability of 20%, and candidate C
with a probability of 10%. How does the used election method
know which situation you like better, when you can cast only
rankings and not ratings?

I reply:

I don´t understand what you´re trying to say, what your example means. But 
I´ve never said that "the used method" should know what situation (?) you 
like better. Check the definition of FBC, and you won´t find mention of 
that.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/