[EM] Remember Toby

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> 
> On May 31, 2011, at 10:46 PM, fsimmons at pcc.edu wrote:

>> It has been averred many times on this list that in Australia, where 
>> partial rankings are considered
>> spoiled ballots,
> 
> that sure makes little sense.  is this related to the mandatory voting 
> laws for Aussies i hear about?

AFAIK, it's related to that you can't claim the IRV winner is a majority 
winner if some people decline to vote for every candidate. Similarly, in 
STV, quotas have to be readjusted if some voters truncate their ballots.

>> the vast majority of voters fill out their ballots by copying 
>> "candidate cards" which are
>> published  sample ballots recommended by the various candidates.
>>
>> Asset voting makes this automatic for 100% of the voters.  That's 
>> probably going too far, so how do we
>> get a compromise between Asset voting and Condorcet?
> 
> i forget what Asset voting is.  is it Approval or Score voting?  (if so, 
> why a different name?)

Asset is basically this:

1. You vote for a candidate.
2. Each candidate gets points proportional to the number of votes he got.
3. All the candidates meet somewhere and negotiate, transferring points.
4. At the end of negotiation, the k winners with the most points win.