[EM] Fwd: Is it professional?

[David L Wetzell]

Ben: "You eliminate form consideration all but the top 3 people who were
ranked, regardless of what rank they got."

dlw: This was unclear about how the top 3 were chosen.

dlw


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Benjamin Grant <benn at 4efix.com> wrote:

> Isn’t that what I said?  If not, where did I get it wrong?****
>
> ** **
>
> -Benn Grant****
>
> eFix Computer Consulting****
>
> benn at 4efix.com****
>
> 603.283.6601****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com [mailto:
> election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com] *On Behalf Of *David L
> Wetzell
> *Sent:* Monday, June 24, 2013 12:20 PM
> *To:* Benjamin Grant
> *Cc:* EM
> *Subject:* Re: [EM] Fwd: Is it professional?****
>
> ** **
>
> I limit the collection of ranking info to up to 3 rankings per voter,
> which is useful for practical purposes, and then treat the up to 3 rankings
> per voter as approval votes to determine which three of the umpteen
> candidates proceed.  I then process those three with the standard IRV to
> find the winner.  ****
>
> ** **
>
> dlw****
>
>
> ****
>
> dlw****
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Benjamin Grant <panjakrejn at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> So if I understand you:****
>
> ** **
>
> You have a single election. You permit people to rank up to 3 candidates,
> no more.  You eliminate form consideration all but the top 3 people who
> were ranked, regardless of what rank they got. Then, with only those three
> left, you proceed to process them with standard IRV to find the winner.***
> *
>
> ** **
>
> Is that a correct summation of you system, do I understand it right?****
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:19 AM, David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> To: Benjamin Grant <benn at 4efix.com>****
>
> ** **
>
> Most IRV in real world limits the rankings to 3 candidates per voter.
> In my approach, I treat the rankings as approval votes in the first round
> ****
>
> and tally up the number of times each candidate gets "ranked" to determine
> 3 finalists.There are 10 ways to rank 3 finalists so I sort the votes into
> these 10 categories, tally them up and use the info to have an instant
> runoff vote among the 3 finalists.****
>
>
> Ben, this is the approach that I said gave the same result for all of the
> cases you brought up in your initial email to the list, which illustrated
> why you thought IRV was flawed.****
>
> dlw****
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ----
> 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/20130624/c8441cbe/attachment-0004.htm>