[Election-Methods] Intermediate rating is never optimal

[Michael Ossipoff]

I'm replying to this Lomax posting only because I received a copy of it in 
individual e-mail from another list-member.

Lomax says:

At 05:33 AM 7/21/2007, Michael Ossipoff wrote:

That's incorrect. It's exactly the same in RV as in Approval. In
your example, with B at your Approval cutoff, it doesn't matter how you rate 
B.

Lomax replies:

In what I wrote, B was not at the voters "approval cutoff."

I reply:

Wrong. You said that the voter had no information about whom the pair-tie 
would be between if there were one. That's what is called a zero-information 
election. In such an election, for the expectation-maximizing voter, one's 
Approval cutoff is at the mean of all the candidates. In your example, B is 
at that mean. In your example, B is exactly at the Approval cutoff.

And, as I said, that's why it doesn't matter how the voter rates B.

Lomax continues:

This is the situation described:

The voter prefers A>B>C, with the preference strength between A and B
being the same as the strength between B and C.

I reply:

No, that's not the situation described. You also said that the voter had no 
information about who would be in the pair-tie if there were one.

Lomax continues:

There is nothing here about Approval cutoff, there is nothing that
says that the voter does or does not "approve" of *any* candidate.

I reply:

As I said, for the voter maximizing hir expectation, in a 0-info election 
such as you describe, the strategy is to vote for the above-mean candidates. 
In your example, B is at the mean, and so B is exactly at the Approval 
cutoff for the expectation-maximizing voter.

Lomax continues:

Ossipoff confused the fact that the candidate was intermediate
between A and C in sincere rating, i.e., being midrange, with being
"at your Approval cutoff."


I reply:

In the 0-info situation that you described, for the expectation-maximizing 
voter, that mean position is indeed the Approval cutoff.

Lomax continues:

And, quite clearly, it *does* matter how
you rate B in some scenarios

I reply:

...but not in your scenario. It should be obvious that I was referring to 
your example. Because I said so.


Please, don't anyone send me copies of Lomax's postings, because I don't 
want to read his rebuttals, because I don't intend to answer them, for the 
reasons that I've given.

But Chris's reply to this Lomax posting was well-expressed, and my own reply 
mostly just repeats Chris's answers.

Mike Ossipoff