[EM] sincerity in range votes / and fantasies

[Warren Smith]

>Yves in reply to wds's criticism of Robla's "range killing" example:
1- Sincerity doesn't exist in politic.  As the vote itself, everything is
always strategic. The concept of democracy is to give the same chances to
all individuals to influence a collective decision.


--wds response:
first of all, if you think there is no sincerity and only strategy exists, then robla's  
example will never happen (since it involved non-strategic votes) and hence
it is not a problem.  

second of all, you are simply wrong that sincerity does not exist, only
strategic votes do.  That is because we did a range voting poll in 2004 - discussed
in   http://math.temple.edu/~wds/crv/PsEl04.html
and found that MOST votes were non-strategic.

There are a considerable number of myths being bandied about as truths
so obvious they need not even be discussed; but there is a major paucity of   
anybody actually consulting the actual evidence.  SInce I did the 
world's only actual study of range voting in practice, my suggestion would be
to take its findings into account.  The full study is
  #82 at http://math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html

I also point out that something like Robla's "range killing" example WOULD
have happened (if there had been honest non-strategic voters, which I rather doubt,
but let us postulate it) in the event there had been a vote in, say, ancient Rome
or the early USA, on A=keep slavery and B=ban it (where slaves allowed to vote).

Robla in that case would consider it a vast injustice and "glaring defect" that
slaves should be freed according to range voting.  I, however, would consider
it a vast injustice that there were slaves, and it would not be a "glaring defect"
but rather an "advantage" that range voting  would choose to free the slaves.

In fact, range voting, while perhaps not perfect in every way, *is* completely
free of glaring defects, as far as I can tell.   None have been brought to my
attention, nor have any been found in a very large computer sim study by
me embracing a very large range of scenarios and voter behaviors.

In this study, range came out with better average utility than eveyr other voting system
tried in every scenario (over 100 scenarios, over 25 voting systems compared).
It is true this study did not include some strategies and some voting systems.
But still it covered a lot of ground and if RV had any glaring defects, I would
think they would have been visible somewhere in all that.

I also point out that Robla on a previous occasion agreed that RV was a good system
and, if I recall correctly said he would be "dancing in the streets" were it 
enacted.   However, yesterday he said he could "never support it"
in view of its "glaring defects."     This behavior seems compatible
with the theory that he is "on drugs"...   but probably it is simply a mater
of robla's priorities getting a little skewed by a little too much exposure to
the EM nerdworld, and after some reconsideration perhaps he will regain his
senses.

cheerio.