[Election-Methods] [EM] "Social Utility Will Look After Itself"

[Forest W Simmons]

If there are N voters, then voting power under random voter is 1/N for 
each voter.

Decent methods yield power proportional to k/sqrt(N), the better the 
method, the larger the k.

Forest

Chris Benham wrote:


>
>Forest W Simmons wrote:
>
>>Chris B wrote...
>>  
>>
>>>Regarding "social utility", I'm of the school that says that to the 
>>>extent that it is a real and wonderful thing it will look after itself 
>>>if we do
>>>our best to ensure that the election method is as fair and 
>>>strategy-resistant as possible.
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>Random Ballot is already fair and as strategy-resistant as possible, so 
>>there is wiggle room here. 
>>
>
>"Random Ballot" is equivalent to having a random citizen appoint the 
>office-holder (i.e. "Random Dictator").
>That isn't an  "election" (it's a lottery), so therefore Random Ballot 
>isn't an "election method".
>
>>How about maximizing voting power, i.e. the 
>>probability that your ballot will make a difference in your favor in a 
>>typical election?
>>
>
>In a large election, I wouldn't think there would be much difference on 
>that score between RB and a normal
>fair deterministic voting method.
>
>Chris Benham
>
>
>
>