[EM] Definition of "sincere approval voting" (was FBC comparison: WV, margins, MMPO, DMC)

Kevin Venzke stepjak at yahoo.fr
Sun Sep 18 13:28:44 PDT 2005


--- Chris Benham <chrisbenham at bigpond.com> a écrit :
> This is my proposed clear definition:
> "An  'approval vote' is one that makes some approval distinction among 
> the candidates. It is sincere if 
> (1)the voter sincerely prefers all the approved candidates (or single 
> candidate) to all the not approved candidates (or single candidate), and
> (2) it is how the voter would vote without any knowledge or guess as to 
> how other voters might vote."

I have trouble with (2). We could assume that "how the voter would vote"
means optimal, above-mean approval strategy. But obviously that is a
problem for a definition of "sincerity." It would also make approval
satisfy NZIS.

Otherwise we could choose to not define "how the voter would vote." But
in that case nothing prevents a strategically unwise vote from being
sincere, so that I don't see how DMC could satisfy NZIS. You would have
to claim that DMC has no zero-info approval strategy.

> By this definition, DMC  (like IRV and unlike WV) meets  "No 
> Zero-Information Strategy".  No method can make it impossible for 
> well-informed
> strategists to sometimes have an advantage, but it irks me that WV  has 
> non-obvious fairly sophisticated strategy for "zero-information" voters
> (random-fill and if you have a big ratings gap, equal-rank above it).

Kevin Venzke


Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list