[Election-Methods] Bullet Voting in the wider media

[Chris Benham]

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

>>If you don't want to use the term "sincere" here, that's fine by me;
>>let's use something else. Let's find some term that describes an
>>ideal method in which a voter can express his true (dictatorial,
>>perhaps benevolently so, perhaps not) preferences without worrying
>>that there's some way of voting otherwise to achieve a better result.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, there is such a method, actually. First of all, you've got to 
>collect the necessary data, and the only ballot that does that is a 
>Range ballot. But you can analyze a Range ballot as if it were a 
>preference ballot with equal ranking allowed. There are two ways to 
>go: with sufficient resolution, it can be a simple Range ballot, 
>because a voter can maintain a preference of only one rating step, 
>which is really pretty small if it is Range 100. It's still pretty 
>small with Range 10! However, if the resolution is low, the device 
>would be used of having a preference indicator that does not alter 
>the Range vote. I.e., you could vote two candidates as perfect 10s 
>but still prefer one.
>
>But, it turns out, you would be unlikely to actually do that, in what 
>I propose. Basically, the ballots are analyzed two ways: sum of 
>votes, which determines a "Range nominee," and pairwise. If the Range 
>winner is the Condorcet winner, and if the rules allow a victory by a 
>plurality (I don't like that), then the election is over. There is no 
>question about "plurality" if the Range winner is preferred by a majority.
>
>But if the Range winner is beaten by another candidate, pairwise by 
>preference, then there is a runoff.
>

Abd,

What do you propose if the Range winner is pairwise beaten by more than 
one candidate?

Chris Benham

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20071010/a548f683/attachment-0003.htm>