[EM] Why Not Condorcet?

[Dave Ketchum]

On May 14, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> Dave, by the way,
> --- En date de : Ven 14.5.10, Dave Ketchum  
> <davek at clarityconnect.com> a écrit :
>> We can dream of value in details as we sit here and
>> debate.  Real-life voters need a way to express their
>> most serious thoughts with reasonable effort:
>>      To vote for more than Plurality's
>> one - which even Approval offers.
>>      To vary their approval according
>> to their amount of liking - Condorcet and Score offer this.
>>      To ask for only reasonable effort
>> from the voters - see Condorcet.
>>      Score demands more.  A voter
>> thinking of A>B>C>D has no trouble offering min and
>> max ratings to A and D.   With Score the
>> voter is expected to diligently assign the available rating
>> space among A>B, B>C, and C>D.
>
> I notice that all of your arguments have to do with the expressiveness
> and simplicity of the ballot (except when you criticize IRV).
>
> Some objections to Condorcet could be:
> 1. It is not expressive enough (compared to ratings)
Truly less expressive in some ways than ratings.
      This is balanced by not demanding ratings details.
      And more expressive by measuring differences between each pair  
of candidates.
>
> 2. Offensive strategy potential (absent in IRV, ratings, Bucklin)
      How is IRV different?
> 3. Lacking guarantees (e.g. FBC or LNHarm)
      Isn't this standard among methods - each with different details?
> 4. Too complicated to explain, or propose (a conceptual hurdle with
> Condorcet is that we leave the actual ballots for the pairwise matrix
> right away, making it hard to understand how voting different ways
> could change things)
      Some Condorcet methods of handling cycles are truly complex - I  
recommend choosing a method for which cycle explaining is doable.
      Counting into the matrix should class as understandable.
> 5. Not thought to be politically acceptable (third place in FPs can  
> win)
You seem to be complaining about newness - a problem for any new  
thought until/unless accepted.
>
>
> So, I wouldn't guess it's about expressiveness for most people.
>
> Kevin Venzke
>
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  
> list info