[EM] "scored condorcet", etc

Paul Kislanko kislanko at airmail.net
Mon Nov 21 14:00:50 PST 2005

If I'm not getting too senile, somewhere I read that the definition of an
"election method" was a mapping of ranked ballots into an ordered list. That
would make "scoring" a Condorcet method a legitimate question.

I have a personal distrust of methods that "score" by looking at only the
contents of the pairwise matrix, but there should surely be a mapping from
the CW back to the ballots that contributed to the CW being the CW. Take
those ballots and remove all winners, moving up all alternatives ranked
lower than the winner. Then form a new pairwise matrix from the revised
ballots, etc. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: election-methods-bounces at electorama.com 
> [mailto:election-methods-bounces at electorama.com] On Behalf Of 
> Gervase Lam
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 3:37 PM
> To: election-methods at electorama.com
> Subject: Re: [EM] "scored condorcet", etc
> > Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:29:16 -0800
> > From: rob brown
> > Subject: [EM] "scored condorcet", etc
> > Therefore, my goal is to come up with a way of producing 
> numerical scores
> > from a condorcet election that can be shown, for instance, 
> as a bar graph.
> If I remember rightly, Forest and then I came up with MinMax(wv) or
> other MinMax Condorcet method.  This is probably the easiest 
> way to get
> scores from a Condorcet method.
> With MinMax, it is very easy to get the scores of the other 
> candidates.
> You don't even need to drop the winning candidate and re-run 
> the method
> again in order to work out the score of the runner up.
> Is MinMax good enough?
> Thanks,
> Gervase.
> ----
> election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list