[EM] Markus: Demonstration that Benham & Woodall meet CD
email9648742 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 9 13:49:01 PST 2014
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Juho Laatu <juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 9.1.2014, at 22.29, Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
> But I'll just add that when you feel A>B, and vote A=B, you aren't really
> falsifying a preference.
> It seems that you are taking about not allowing the voter to "indicate a
> false (strict) preference" but allowing the voter to "indicate a false
Exactly. You're falsifying an indifference, but you're not falsifying a
preference. An indifference certainly is not a preference.
Elsewhere in that sincerity definition, I _do_ speak of failing to vote a
> You may need also a definition that says that unranked candidates (=not in
> the ballot) are considered to be ranked below the last ranked candidate.
> Different rules or wordings may apply to methods where this is not the case.
No, because my definitions of voting X over Y are entirely independent of
But certainly if you rank X last, and you don't rank Y, then, by all of my
definitions, that is voting X over Y. Likewise by everyone's intuitive
My definitions of voting X over Y don't need different wordinsfor different
> Is it ok to rank A last (on the ballot) even if one could leave A unranked
>> (=not mentioned in the ballot)?
> Certainly, by any of my definitions of voting X over Y, and by anyone's
> intuitive judgement.
> Many methods consider unranked candidates to be effectively ranked below
> all the ranked candidates.
Certainly, and all of my definitions of voting X over Y would agree.
(...unless it's a definition-version that is with respect to the method in
which takes place the particular voting being discussed, and that is a
method that doesn't have that interpretation.)
> Therefore ranking A last on the ballot (when there are also unranked
> candidates) seems to me to violate your condition "B voters refuse to vote
> A over anyone".
Wait a minute. If you ran A last, an there are unranked candidates, then my
method nonspecific definitions would say that you're voting A over
someone. My definitons with respect the the method in which takes place
the voting that's under discussion would or wouldn't call that "not voting
A over anyone", depending on whether they count that as voting A over
someone. Of course every rank method that we discuss here, and probably
every rank method that allows ranking fewer than all the candidates, would
say that you're voting A over someone, when you rank A at the bottom of
your short ranking, and there are candidates whom you don't rank
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Election-Methods