[EM] Re: SR

[Abd ulRahman Lomax]

At 01:07 AM 9/20/2005, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>Well, for such voters, Approval is ideal (if it were only more 
>publicly acceptable). But maybe people insist on a rank method.

As to the public acceptability of Approval, it may depend on how it 
is presented. While Approval could have major implications, it is not 
really such a radical reform. All that is necessary is to stop 
trashing overvoted ballots. And it could be presented that way, so 
instead of calling it Approval, it might be called Expanded Voter 
Choice or something like that. Or Stop Trashing Votes.

The goal would be to put the shoe on the other foot: I think the 
no-overvote rule is indefensible; the legitimate objections to 
Approval are based on the theory that the Condorcet winner should 
win. But the choice may not be between Condorcet and Approval, but 
only between Plurality and Approval.

If we get Approval, and especially if the implementation allows the 
expression of simple preference, whether or not counted for winner 
purposes, it would then be simple to move toward further reforms 
including full ranking. There will be more actual election data....