[EM] FW: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better Proposal

[Paul Kislanko]

Regarding: 
Jeff wrote ...
 
> [ Note: Voters will execute almost the same ballot regardless of what
> ranked voting method we choose. -- JRF ]
 
I feel this is undoubtedly true. I think it is very important to keep the
idea of ranked ballots on the table, because us voters intuitively are good
at ranking things. Give me a ranked ballot and I can fill out, and allow me
to help figure out how to count ranked ballots as a SEPARATE issue. Just
give me ranked ballots and I can live through using a "wrong" method to
count 'em for a few election cycles.


  _____  

From: election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com] On Behalf Of
Simmons, Forest 
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 5:48 PM
To: election-methods-electorama.com at electorama.com
Subject: [EM] FW: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better
Proposal


Somehow this message didn't pass muster for the Condorcet list.

  _____  

From: Simmons, Forest 
Sent: Wed 9/28/2005 2:31 PM
To: Condorcet at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Condorcet] Re: why the Schulze Method is a Better Proposal


Jeff wrote ...
 
> [ Note: Voters will execute almost the same ballot regardless of what
> ranked voting method we choose. -- JRF ]

Forest replies:  
 
If voters are going to rank the candidates without regard for the method,
then there is no gratuitous approval problem in the implicit approval
version of DMC.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20050930/bc0f6918/attachment-0003.htm>