[EM] thoughts on the pairwise matrix
davek at clarityconnect.com
Mon Nov 28 20:33:40 PST 2005
You are mixing two topics:
By "wrong" I assume you mean counting something different than what was
voted, accidentally due to carelessness, or deliberately for evil reasons.
Certainly an important topic, but such wrongs are possible regardless of
election method and DO NEED attention.
A second topic is whether voters are PERMITTED to vote their desires
reasonably completely and understandably - here method matters. A
frequent occurrence is three competitive candidates, A, B, and C, with the
voter seeing A as desirable, B as tolerable, and C as INtolerable:
Plurality - voter cannot SAY that both A and B are better than C
Approval - voter cannot SAY that A is better than B AND both are
better than C.
Condorcet - voter CAN say A>B>C.
So we need BOTH:
A method that lets voters express their desires AND
Demand that whatever we vote does get counted.
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:54:27 -0600 Paul Kislanko wrote:
>>Rob Brown wrote:
>>Isn't the fact that Condorcet methods ignore ballot positions
>>the "whole field of alternatives" the whole beauty of what Condorcet
> That's my reason to distrust them. What is "beuatiful" about getting my vote
davek at clarityconnect.com people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 607-687-5026
Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
If you want peace, work for justice.
More information about the Election-Methods