[EM] Why care about later-no-harm or prohibiting candidate burial?

[Kathy Dopp]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm. I think you missed my next sentence.
>
>> Burial works against compromise by encouraging voters to rank the potential compromise candidate last.
>

Again, voters do *not* try to bury their 2nd choice compromise
candidates, but try to bury their last choice candidates, or their
last choice mainstream candidate, and would prefer that any other
candidate wins. As Jonathan noted "burial is a simple, intuitive and
attractive strategy that can be easily employed by relatively naive
voters."

Or are you claiming that voters are all hopelessly idiotic and would
prefer that their last choice candidate wins as long as their
compromise candidate can be buried!?*!  The claim that voters would
bury their compromise candidates is illogical drivel.


-- 

Kathy Dopp
http://electionmathematics.org
Town of Colonie, NY 12304
"One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the
discussion with true facts."

Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections
http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174

Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting
http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf

View some of my research on my SSRN Author page:
http://ssrn.com/author=1451051