[EM] Majority-Judgement. Condorcet.

[Jameson Quinn]

2012/2/3 Ted Stern <araucaria.araucana at gmail.com>

> On 03 Feb 2012 16:07:59 -0800, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> >
> > Personally I don't understand why one would want to spend time on a
> > method that you have to defend by saying "it might work anyway,"
> > even if as built the incentives are wrong.
> >
> > I like the idea of being able to test things, so I may be biased here.
> >
> > It's taking a shot in the dark. How fantastic must this method be,
> > for that to seem like a good idea? It's hard to believe one couldn't
> > go back and work out something that more reliably does whatever you
> > were going for.
> >
> > Also, if MJ is a serious proposal it should be called "median
> > rating" and use the Bucklin tiebreaker. You'd have a name that means
> > something and a tiebreaker that isn't a pain to solve. At the top
> > rating (the one we all agree might matter) the rules aren't even
> > different.
>
> Can anyone explain how Majority Judgment differs in practice from
> Bucklin with equal ratings allowed?  AKA Fallback Approval?  Or
> one of the many versions of Majority Choice Approval (another vague
> name, IMO)?
>

In practice? Not at all. Except there's a book about it.


>
> > The name is so bad. Imagine you hear that on the news and are trying
> > to figure out what it means. "Majority" doesn't tell you that much
> > (IRV already does majorities and they didn't even need to put it in
> > the name) and "judgment" refers to what? The voting. They're calling
> > it "judgment" though.  Puke. So dramatic and it doesn't even say
> > anything.
> >
> > The tie-breaker is the same thing really. It sounds neat and fair to
> > pull out median votes one by one, but in practice that isn't the
> > methodology, you really should use math. Try coding MJ and then see
> > how much code you could delete, how much less thought it would've
> > taken you, if you just wanted the Bucklin tiebreaker instead.
> >
>
> And you can delete even more code if it is just ER-Bucklin.
>

Yup. But most voters don't worry about lines of code.

JQ


>
> Ted
> --
> araucaria dot araucana at gmail dot com
>
> ----
> 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/20120203/d76faa60/attachment-0004.htm>