[EM] the 'who' and the 'what' - trying again

[Dave Ketchum]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 19:52:31 -0400 Michael Allan wrote:
> Dave Ketchum wrote:
> 
>>Cycles happen, and perhaps should be reported, but are NOT a reason for he 
>>system to do anything special beyond normal analysis and reporting.
>>
>>Of course reporting should e based on total voting, thus updated as soon as 
>>practical after any vote.  Big point is that cycles happen and nothing gets 
>>done to encourage or discourage their existence.
> 
> 
> Assume the ideal Condorcet resolution is no resolution at all.  If
> reality intervenes and you would have a resolution, the closest to the
> ideal is a hands-off method.

I do not understand 'no resolution':

By time N1 there have been 10 votes in the poll - to analyze as a complete 
Condorcet election.

By time N2 there have been 2 more, for a total of 12 to analyze as if a 
complete election.

Any such election may produce a CW.

Those that do not produce a CW result in a cycle.  I suggest at least the 
ability to implement multiple cycle resolution formulas, to support 
comparison of the resolutions provided by various formulas.
> 
> If it is a hands-off method, it ought to be transparent to other
> hands-off methods.  No need to restrict to a single one.  Allow
> multiple parallel resolutions and approach even closer to the ideal
> (Condorcet, phantom, and test bed or proving grounds) of no resolution
> at all.
> 
> In terms of technical supports, Votorola's core is a continuous
> medium.  It never reports a winner at all.  So it meets the ideal.
> But the design allows for parallel analyses and massaging of the raw
> data stream.  So external sites can report their own resolutions in
> more-or-less real time.  (But this might not be implemented till the
> production release, depending on need.)

Here I see Votorola offering a useful, though incomplete, service.  What I 
see desirable for Condorcet is an external site using that service.
> 
> In terms of my own interest, I want a rough understanding of how
> external signals will cross with other events in the real world, and
> influence the ideal (core, Condorcet, phantom).  This discussion has
> me thinking that cascade decision rings are not a resolution mechanism
> after all, but some kind of defence formation (wagon circle) or
> protective response against (at least in part) external pressures.
> 
Possible values of such as wagon circles seem minimal to me for the current 
discussion.

I do see external pressures possibly influencing later votes based on 
earlier results - all a human loop.

These polls vary from real elections:
      Current content of polls can be analyzed while voting continues.
      Real elections do not get analyzed until after voting ends.
-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.