[Election-Methods] elect the compromise

[Forest W Simmons]

Jobst,

I'm not sure how to define "rational" in this context, either.

As for the prisoner's dilemma problem, I wonder if the possibility of 
"defection" could be eliminated by having trading parties sit down and 
sign binding agreements during formal trading.

My Best,

Forest


Jobst Heitzig wrote:


>Dear Forest,
>
>> Perhaps candidates should be required to publish their range ballots 
>> before the election, and their "trading" of assets should be required 
>> to be "rational" relative to these announced ratings?
>>   
>
>I had this idea, too. But upon closer inspection, it is not quite easy 
>to define what in this case "rational" means, since in this form of 
>trading there easily arise situations similar to the prisoner's dilemma 
>and situations in which "bluffing" could work...
>
>Yours, Jobst
>
>> Or perhaps, a randomly chose jury of candidate X supporters should 
have 
>> some say in the candidate X proxy decisions?
>>
>> Forest
>>
>>
>>
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list 
info
>>
>>
>>   
>
>
>