[EM] Single Contest

[fsimmons at pcc.edu]

From: Jameson Quinn 

> To be clear: if X and Y are the same, there's no need for a runoff?

That's right.  I hope that isn't be too anticlimatic!

> 
> 2011/7/23 
> 
> > If one of the finalists is chosen by a method that satisfies 
> the majority
> > criterion, then you can skip step
> > one, and the method becomes smoother.
> >
> > Here are some possibilities for the method that satisfies the 
> majority> criterion: DSC, Bucklin, and the
> > following range ballot based method:
> >
> > Elect the candidate X with the greatest value of p such that 
> more than p/2
> > percent of the ballots rate X at
> > least p percent of the maxRange value.
> >
> > That method is similar to the one that Andy Jennings suggested 
> recently,> and which I think could be the
> > method to choose the other finalist:
> >
> > Elect the candidate Y with the greatest value of p such that 
> at least p
> > percent of the ballots rate Y at p
> > percent of the maxRange value or higher.
> >
> > If these last two methods are used to choose the finalists, X 
> and Y, then a
> > strict majority top rated
> > candidate will automatically win. The voters don't have to 
> agonize over
> > approval cutoffs, they can just
> > grade the candidates on a scale of zero to maxRange. In fact 
> that's what
> > Andy had in mind ... an
> > approval-like method that sets the cutoff level (in the sense 
> that Bucklin
> > can be thought of as a method
> > for setting the approval cutoff level), but in a more robust 
> way than
> > Bucklin. In addition the composite
> > method is monotone, and at least marginally clone independent 
> (i.e. in the
> > same way that Range is)..
> > ----