[EM] FW: ? about SR

[Paul Kislanko]

Yes, I had the difference pointed out offlist. I misunderstood one aspect of
SR, so the counting code isn't exactly the same.

I tend to like Bucklin-variants because they avoid problems that I find most
offensive. Even if not used as an election method, I find it very useful as
an analytical tool to find the level of "majority support" for an
alternative.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com 
> [mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com
> ] On Behalf Of Kevin Venzke
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 3:53 PM
> To: em
> Subject: RE: [EM] FW: ? about SR
> 
> Paul,
> 
> --- Paul Kislanko <kislanko at airmail.net> a écrit :
> > When I read Mike Ossipoff's description of Summed-Ranks it 
> looked identical
> > to what I've been using to linearize my sport polls. I was 
> told what I was
> > doing was Bucklin, so now my question is what exactly is 
> the difference
> > between SR and Bucklin? Everybody seems to like SR and 
> everybody seems to
> > dismiss Bucklin, but if the program that implements the 
> counting is the same
> > for both, they must be equivalent.  
> 
> SR and Bucklin aren't the same:
> 
> 13 A>B>C>D
> 13 B>C>A>D
> 13 C>A>B>D
> 60 D
> 
> Bucklin elects D. SR is an ABC tie.
> 
> I would say Bucklin is better than SR because it satisfies 
> the majority
> criterion for solid coalitions and minimal defense (and thus SDSC).
> 
> Kevin Venzke
> 
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 	
> 		
> ______________________________________________________________
> _____________ 
> Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau 
> Yahoo! Messenger 
> Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info
>