[EM] Has this idea been considered?

[Russ Paielli]

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>wrote:

> Russ, you said that SODA was too complicated. In my prior message, I
> responded by saying that it was actually pretty simple. But thanks for your
> feedback; I realize that the SODA page was not conveying that simplicity
> well. I've changed the procedure there from 8 individual steps to 4 steps -
> simple one-sentence overviews - with the details in sub-steps. Of these 4
> steps, only step 1 is not in your proposal. And the whole of step 4 is just
> three words.
>
> The procedure is exactly the same, but I hope that this version<http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Simple_Optionally-Delegated_Approval#Procedure>does a better job of communicating the purpose and underlying simplicity of
> the system.
>
>
I still think that's too complicated. The whole "do not delegate" option is
over the top -- way over the top for major public elections. Also, the
week-long delay after the initial count is unacceptable. Why is it necessary
if, as you say, "the correct strategies for all candidates and the resulting
winner will already be obvious"?

Yeah, I know it's frustrating. Back when I was somewhat active on this list,
I got caught up in complicated schemes, but I eventually realized I was
kidding myself to think that those schemes will ever see the light of day in
major public elections. What is the limit of complexity that the general
public will accept on a large scale? I don't know, but I have my doubts that
anything beyond simple Approval will ever pass muster -- and even that will
be a hard sell.

Your SODA rules may be mathematically sublime and beautiful, but it won't
matter. Once you start explaining it to the general public, people will just
roll their eyes ask what you are smoking to make you think that these rules
would ever be used in a major election. I wish it weren't so, but I'm afraid
it is.

If you take out the "do not delegate" option and eliminate the week-long
delay, you might have a better chance, but even that will be a very tough
sell.

Regards,
Russ

-- 
http://RussP.us
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20110705/ddaf9209/attachment-0004.htm>