[EM] Re: majority rule vs. maximum approval (was: least additional votes)

[Forest Simmons]

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, James Green-Armytage wrote:

> James G-A replying to Forest Simmons, about fundamental Condorcet vs.
> approval issues
>
>> James opined that the winner should always come from the Smith set
>> because
>> otherwise majority rule is violated more than necessary.
>> However, it seems to me that majority is just one form of consensus.
>> Max approval is another form.
>
> 	Majority rule methods don't aim for consensus. They are used when
> consensus is considered impossible/impractical.

I should have made it more clear that I wasn't talking exclusively about 
100% consensus, though that is the (usually impossible) democratic ideal.

But the greater the consensus, the better.

If no significant consensus is possible, then (as Jobst argued) the best 
we can do is give the strongest contenders a chance at winning.

I think of approval and Condorcet as probes for measuring the amount of 
consensus.  Each measures in a different way.

Respecting one and ignoring the other is a way of losing valuable 
information.

The question is how to best integrate the information from the two probes.

I think Cardinal Pairwise is a great step in the right direction.

Forest