[EM] Dave: Condorcet

[Jameson Quinn]

2012/4/1 robert bristow-johnson <rbj at audioimagination.com>

> On 4/1/12 2:23 PM, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>  On Mar 28, 2012, at 10:42 AM, MIKE OSSIPOFF (whom i've plonked) wrote:
>>
>>> Dave:
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>>
>>> Which leaves me promoting Condorcet.  It allows ranking but, unlike
>>> ABucklin or IRV, all that a voter ranks gets counted.  Further, any
>>> voter able to match their desires to Plurality or Approval for a
>>> particular election, can vote by those rules and have them counted
>>> with the same power by Condorcet rules.
>>>
>> Why bother?  I see Fine and Soso as best so would consider approving
>> both.  Trouble is that this would imply equal liking, perhaps getting Soso
>> elected while I like Fine much better.
>>
>> With Condorcet I can rank Fine above Soso, so that my ranking can improve
>> the chance of Fine getting elected, while Soso has a chance if Fine fails.
>>
>
> the question the Approval guys never seem to answer is: "Do I or do I not
> approve my 2nd choice?"  (It is a similar question to the counterpart in
> Range/Score: "How high do I rate my 2nd choice?")


There are many answers to that question, depending on how simple you want
it, and how much polling information you have. I understand that many
answers is in some cases as bad as none.


>   Approval applies a burden of tactical voting to the voter right from the
> start.  perhaps someone will want to bury a candidate they sorta like but
> who is not their favorite, to help their favorite win.


This is true.


>  if they don't Approve, then how much Bayesian regret will result when
> they find out their favorite was not in the running at all and their 2nd
> choice lost narrowly to someone they hated?  if they do Approve, how much
> regret will result when their favorite lost narrowly to their 2nd choice?
>

The good thing is, the simple answer to both of these questions is "less
than with plurality".


>
> so with me, the Score and Approval advocates do not get past square 1
> because of that.


Well, if square 1 is plurality, then I'd strongly disagree. If square 1 is
"what's the best possible voting system", then I'm not sure what square 2
would be, but I'd still agree, as I think most people here would.

Jameson


>
>
> --
>
> r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com
>
> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
>
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120401/f5e84168/attachment-0003.htm>