# [EM] DMC, Ties & Eppley's RVH

Dave Ketchum davek at clarityconnect.com
Fri Sep 2 13:20:52 PDT 2005

```On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:33:05 -0400 Eric Gorr wrote:

> Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 08:26:32 -0400 Eric Gorr wrote:
>>
>>> Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:08:08 -0400 Eric Gorr wrote:
>>>> Most of the places for which RVH claims value cannot benefit without
>>>> voters accepting it as suitable - give them a black box without
>>>> content they can understand with reasonable effort and they properly
>>>> choke.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Again, what is difficult to understand about the RVH?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What does it do
>
>
> Resolve a tie.
>
>> why
>
>
> Because a tie needs to be resolved.
>
>> and when?
>
>
> Whenever a method needs to resolve a tie.
>
>>> How would you describe the procedure the RVH uses to select the
>>> strict, random ordering of the candidates?
>>>
>>> Why would the average person not be able to understand the selection
>>> of a series of ballots at random?
>>>
>> Since I do not understand why bother,
>
>
> Ah, I didn't realize you didn't know how the RVH worked.

Since I have not deciphered why bother, I have not done a detailed analysis.

>
>> I start wondering what you mean by "random".
>
>
> Let's say that we have the following set of ballots:
>
> 60:a>b>c
> 20:b>c>a
> 20:c>a>b

Since I see a winning via majority vote, I see no tie to need breaking.

>
> There is a 60% chance the tie breaking order would be: a>b>c
> There is a 20% chance the tie breaking order would be: b>c>a
> There is a 20% chance the tie breaking order would be: c>a>b

Explaining why I ever would declare b or c as winners based on the above
vote, I would not let such a tie breaker near such a collection of ballots.

>
> If a ballot does not fully define a strict ordering of the candidates,
> the orderings of the candidates are kept and another ballot is selected.
> Preferences from this new ballot, which do not conflict with previously
> kept preferences are kept. Keep going until a strict ordering of the
> candidates is found.
>
> Is there anything you do not understand?
>
> If so, please provide your own set of ballots and try to work through it
> yourself. Please describe in detail what you think should happen at each
> step.
>
> The primary reason why the RVH is better then simply selecting a tied
> candidate at random is because it provides a statistical edge to those
> candidates who are preferred by a majority of voters.
>

--
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.

```