[EM] Has this idea been considered?

[Jameson Quinn]

I'm sorry, but aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhh.

I think that people on this list are smart, but this is pathetic. I don't
mean to be hard on Dave in particular. But why is it impossible to get any
two of us to agree on anything? I want to make a list of systems which are

1. Commonly agreed to be better than approval.
2. Commonly agreed to be simple for an average voter to feel that they
understand what's going on.

I am not asking each person who responds to choose the best or simplest
system according to them. I'm asking everyone to vote in the
poll<http://betterpolls.com/do/1425> and
approve (rate higher than 0) all systems which meet those two very low bars.
Hopefully, the result will be a consensus. It will almost certainly not be
the two best, simplest systems by any individual's personal reckoning.

As to the specific comments:

2011/7/8 Dave Ketchum <davek at clarityconnect.com>

> What I see:
> .     Condorcet - without mixing in Approval.
>

You need some cycle-breaker. Implicit approval is the only order-N
tiebreaker I know; fundamentally simpler than any order-N² tiebreaker like
minimax. You don't have to call it approval if you don't like the name.


> .     SODA - for trying, but seems too complex.
>

I disagree, but I'm biased. I feel that "approve any number of candidates or
let your favorite candidate do it for you; most approvals wins" is easy to
understand. But I can understand if people disagree, so I'm not criticizing
this logic.


> .     Reject Approval - too weak to compete.
>

Worse than plurality????????

JQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20110708/b235ad13/attachment-0004.htm>