[EM] [CES #9024] Re: EMAV?

[Jameson Quinn]

It seems to me that we're not connecting on several levels.

Most importantly, on consensus process. I've participated in consensus
decisions in real life, and it seems to me that there are at least two
different ways they can break down. You are right that one of the ways is
for a majority to lose patience with a minority and try to strongarm them.
But another way is for a minority to be too comfortable with holding up the
process. Yes, holding back from consensus is a right, but it comes with the
obligation to seek a common understanding, not to become complacently
attached to individual understandings.

Second, on tactical voting and the chicken dilemma. I believe I understand
your arguments, and they have some validity. It would certainly be possible
to overemphasize the importance of these issues. But somehow you seem to
think your arguments allow you to ignore these issues entirely. On that
count, truth isn't a democracy, but if I were you the fact that your
position is basically a minority of one on this issue, among a bunch of
smart people here who have thought about it seriously, would certainly give
me pause.

Third, on whether EMAV has any advantage that is not beaten either by Score
or by MAV. On this point, you said:

>  Not as responsive or simple as Score,

I'd disagree. It is more responsive than Jameson's proposal, MAV,

I don't see where you're disagreeing there. Of course EMAV is more
responsive than MAV, but score is even more so. Somebody (like Clay) who
values responsiveness will therefore prefer Score. Similarly, EMAV is more
strategy-resistant than Score, but MAV is even more so; so someone (like
me) who values encouraging honest ballots will therefore prefer MAV. I
don't see any principled criteria by which EMAV anything but a second-best
compromise. I'm happy to sign onto such a compromise if that's what it
takes to get progress; but not simply to satisfy a single person's
not-invented-here scruples.

Jameson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20130701/9ea716d5/attachment-0004.htm>