[EM] Majority-Judgement using adjectives versus alphabetical scales versus numerical ranges.

Jameson Quinn jameson.quinn at gmail.com
Sat Dec 8 06:01:23 PST 2012

> And MJ itself does tiebreaking by providing + and - to the actual grade
> returned. For instance, in the 2007 Orsay experiment, Bayrou got Good+
> while Sarkozy got Good-. So I don't think the grade inputs should be given
> with + and -, because the method appends a + and - to the result as part of
> the tiebreak process.

By the way, I like the idea of an additional "AA" grade, so that A+ is
attainable. In theory, that also makes AA- possible, but I doubt any
candidate would ever be that good. (Previously, I'd suggested that the
additional grade be called "A+", but an "A+-" possibility would be too

Also, I have no problem with the idea that there should be a table on the
ballot of grade:adjective correspondences somewhere on the ballot, probably
at the bottom. "AA:Excellent A:Very Good B:Good C:Fair D:Poor
F:Unacceptable". ("Reject" is an abbreviated translation from the French,
but in English the poor parallelism sets my teeth on edge. I'm not
threatening to cap anyone over it, though :). )

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20121208/eb69794e/attachment-0003.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list