[EM] Voting by selecting a published ordering

[Simmons, Forest]

Dave (in response to Jobst) wrote ...

Assuming "also approved" is synonymous with "approved", the counting is
simple but, as soon as my vote can affect the result and I WANT to say:
     FOR A
     AGAINST B
     Vote against C interfering with A, BUT for C being preferred over B

I cannot say this with approval.

I reply: 
 
Actually, "also approved" is not synonymous with "approval."    Rather, it means "approved in addition to the candidate marked favorite," as will be clear from the examples below.
 
I think that your main point is that you want to rank A>B>C, but you don't think Jobst's suggestion allows for this.  
 
Actually it does:
 
If A's published order is A>B>C, then you can just mark A  as favorite, and forget about the "also approved" part.
 
If A's published order is A>C>B, then you can mark A as favorite, and then mark B as also approved.  This will result in the ballot being interpreted as  A>B>C , with an approval cutoff between B and C available for use if desired.
 
The approval cutoff would be used in DMC, for example, but not in MAM.
 
In other words, if you don't like methods that use approval cutoffs, just think of the "also approved" option as a tool for correcting the most egregious mistake in the order of the best available list choice.
 
Suppose, for example, that your preference order is
 
A>B>C>D>E>F>G, and that candidate A's published order is 
A>B>D>C>F>G>E, and that you consider the CD to DC switch a relatively minor nuissance, but you feel very strongly that E should be ranked ahead of F and G.   Then by marking candidate A as your first choice, and marking B, C, D, and E as "also approved" you can move E back into its rightful position, and your final order will be interpreted as
 
A>B>D>C>E>F>G, with only the minor C/D switch between this and your dream ballot.
 
Now, a comment on Dan Bishop's message: it is an excellent illustration of one variation that Eppley suggested near the end of his original post on this topic.
 
Dan wrote ...

For that matter, why limit list sponsorship to candidates?  The ballot
could look something like this:


************ STATE OF TEXAS  ************
************ OFFICIAL BALLOT ************

       U.S. House of Representatives

-----------------------------------------

Either choose an ordering of candidates from the LISTS section
OR rank the candidates in the CANDIDATES section.

--------------    LISTS    --------------

To choose a list, mark the box next to it.  You may vote for
only ONE list.

[ ] REPUBLICAN PARTY
     John Carter, Randy Neugebauer, Tom Delay, Joe Barton
[ ] DEMOCRATIC PARTY
     Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Green, Charlie Gonzales,
     Eddie Johnson, ...
[ ] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
     Sheila Jackson Lee, Eddie Johnson, Charlie Gonzales,
     Rub?n Hinojosa, ...
[ ] FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL
     Tom Delay, John Culberson, Sam Johnson, Louie Gohmert, ...
[ ] LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS
     Lloyd Doggett, Eddie Johnson, Sheila Jackson Lee, ...
     Charlie Gonzales
[ ] NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
     Tom Delay, Henry Bonilla, Pete Sessions, Kay Granger
...

-------------- CANDIDATES  --------------

Write an "A" in the box next to your favorite candidate, a
"B" next to your second-favorite candidate, a "C" next to
your third-favorite candidate, etc.  You may rank as many
candidates as you wish.

[ ] Louie Gohmert
[ ] Ted Poe
[ ] Sam Johnson
[ ] Ralph Hall
...


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 7290 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20060410/c36da757/attachment-0003.bin>