[EM] remember Toby Nixon?

[Dave Ketchum]

On May 25, 2011, at 2:07 AM, Andrew Myers wrote:
> On 7/22/64 11:59 AM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>> On May 24, 2011, at 6:42 PM, fsimmons at pcc.edu wrote:
>>>
>>> About six years ago Toby Nixon asked the members of this EM list  
>>> for a
>>> advice on what election method
>>> to try propose in the Washington State Legislature. He finally  
>>> settled
>>> on CSSD beatpath. As near as I
>>> know nothing came of it. What would we propose if we had another
>>> opportunity like that?
>>> It seems to me that people have rejected IRV, Bucklin, and other
>>> methods based on ranked ballots
>>> because they don’t want to rank the candidates.
>>
>> I would propose Condorcet, with just a few clarifications:
>> Leave CSSD beatpath as a detail method decision to resolve later.
>> Reject IRV for known problems.
>> Those unranked are simply counted as having the bottom rank.
>> Write-ins permitted and counted as if actually nominated. This is a  
>> bit
>> of extra pain, but I like it better than demanding extra nominations
>> that enemies could make unacceptably difficult.
>> Equal ranking permitted. Those who like Approval should understand  
>> that
>> using a single rank lets them express their desire without  
>> considering
>> ranking in detail.
>> No restrictions as to how rank numbers compare - when considering  
>> which
>> of a pair has higher rank, ONLY their ranks compare as H>L, L>H, or  
>> E=-
>> what ranks are assigned to other candidates have no effect on this.
>> No restriction as to how many rank numbers a voter may use, beyond  
>> fact
>> that a chosen ballot design may impose a limit as to how many can be
>> expressed.
>> DYN is a simple addition for those who see value in that method.
>
> Having conducted in the CIVS system an experiment over the past  
> several years as to whether people are able to deal with ranked  
> ballots, I have to say that voters seem to be able to deal with  
> ranking choices. In fact they will even rank dozens of choices. As  
> long as the user interface is not painful, it's not a big deal for  
> most people. So I would choose Condorcet in a second. Like Dave, I  
> don't think the completion method matters a great deal. However,  
> write-ins are a more complicated issue and it is still not clear to  
> me how to handle them fairly.

I was not limiting how much deciding on completion method matters -  
just saying what I do care about matters more.

Ranking dozens?  I think some overdo that - It should be acceptable  
for any voter to quit after ranking those they care most about.

Two thoughts on write-ins:
      When having a lone thought it matters little.
      When wanting to elect one who is not nominated, get serious and  
campaign, just as you do for a favored nominee.
>
>
> -- Andrew