[Election-Methods] method designchallenge+new method AMP

[raphfrk at netscape.net]

 fsimmons said:

> > Jobst wrote:
> > > ? 45: A 100 > C 90 > B,D 0?
> > 
> > > ? 44: B 100 > C 90 > A,D 0?
> > 
> > > ? 11: D 100 > A,B,C 0 
> > 
> 
> What if the tentative increases involved more general incremental changes to the lotteries? 
> 
> Suppose we start with the (45, 44, 0, 11)%? lottery and try averaging in the lottery? (0,0,2,1)/3 with respective weights of 100 and three in order to arrive at the proposed improvement
> 
> (45, 44, 2, 12)/103 .
> 
> The respective factions' expectations would go from
>
> (.45, .44, .11), to? approximately? (.454, .445, .117)
> 
> 100 percent of the voters would find this to be a slight improvement.

This has increased the D candidate's chances of winning, which is movement away from the utility winner.

The idea is to try to focus as much probability as possible on 1 candidate by having voters compromise.

Since the D supporters weren't willing to compromise (by bullet voting), I don't think they should get a boost.

Old
(0.45, 0.44, 0.00, 0.11)

New
(0.44, 0.43, 0.02, 0.12) (approx)

A supporters:
A probability down 1%
C probability up 2%

B supporters:
B probability down 1%
C probability up 2%

D supporters:
D probability up 1%

Thus D obtained a benefit without accepting a loss.? This isn't fair.

The A and B supporters are working together to get a result that benefits both sets of supporters, thus the benefit should go to them.

Also, any change that drops D's probability will be vetoed by D's supporters.

> Which incremental lotteries should be tried?

That is a good question.? I think that the benefit of any boost should be shared by those who are involved in the 'deal'.

> Why not? just take suggestions from the candidates, parties, voters, etc.? Then keep using the ones that work out best until none of them give any additional improvement at the required consensus level.

I am not sure if that would work.? The order would matter and would give unfair share to voters who bullet voted.

Getting the benefits of any compromise should be the reward for compromising.


 


Raphfrk
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"

www.wikocracy.com

 




________________________________________________________________________
AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080510/09b87d42/attachment-0003.htm>