[EM] margin vs winning votes

[Stéphane Rouillon]

Gosh, it was a long time ago...

I'll try to find back that stuff.
If I remember well, it was valid for full rankings, not partial ones...
In fact, I found a counter-example for partial rankings.

The problem is I do not have access to archives prior to 2007 on my 
computer.

Le 2014-07-23 15:00, C.Benham a écrit :
>
>> voting your favorite sincerely as first choice instead of not voting 
>> cannot make him lose while winning votes is the criteria.
>> voting your favorite sincerely as first choice instead of not voting 
>> can make him lose while margin is the criteria. 
>
> Stephane,
> I'd be interested in seeing that, because I think it's been shown 
> that  Mono-add-Top (the property you refer to) is incompatible
> with Smith, which is met by Winning Votes using Schulze, Ranked Pairs 
> or River.
>
> Juho has promoted  MinMax(Margins), which does meet Mono-add-Top (and 
> Condorcet).
>
> http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Mono-add-top_criterion
>
> Looking at this my claim in my first sentence might be slightly 
> wrong.  But Winning Votes meets both of  Condorcet and the
> Plurality criterion, and (as it says on that page) Douglas Woodall has 
> shown that it therefore can't meet Mono-add-Top.
>
> MinMax(Margins) fails both of  Plurality and Smith.
>
> BTW, I don't like either of  Winning Votes or Margins. Of the 
> alternatives that are equivalent to both when all the voters give a
> full strict ranking I think the best is  Losing Votes (erw). Ballots 
> that equal-rank candidates  A and B both above at least one other
> candidate are counted in the pairwise contest between A and B as 
> giving a whole vote to each. Ballots that rank A and B equal-bottom
> (or truncate A and B) count as zero to both in their pairwise contest. 
> The method considers that the greater the number of votes
> on the losing side, the weaker the pairwise defeat.
>
> And not limiting ourselves to alternatives that are equivalent to 
> Margins and Winning Votes (and Losing Votes) when all the voters
> give a full strict ranking, I think better still is  "MinMax Losing 
> Votes (erw) Margins", which I first suggested in April this year.
>
> http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2014-April/097935.html 
>
>
> Chris  Benham
>
>
>
> On 7/23/2014 11:24 AM, Stéphane Rouillon wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> As I took the time to illustrate many years ago,
>>
>> voting your favorite sincerely as first choice instead of not voting 
>> cannot make him lose while winning votes is the criteria.
>> voting your favorite sincerely as first choice instead of not voting 
>> can make him lose while margin is the criteria.
>>
>> An interesting property.
>>
>> S.Rouillon, still reading...
>> PS: And Forest, I still use that Universal Preference Ballot !
>>
>> Le 2014-07-22 21:17, robert bristow-johnson a écrit :
>>> On 7/22/14 7:11 PM, Forest Simmons wrote:
>>>> Like Chris Benham, Kevin Venzke, and others I owe a lot to Mike 
>>>> Ossipoff.
>>>>
>>>> He patiently explained difficult concepts by repeating the same 
>>>> concepts in different words until reaching the simplest 
>>>> formulation.  This was a tremendous help for me when I didn't see 
>>>> the point of "winning votes" versus "margins" fourteen years ago 
>>>> (for example).
>>>
>>> i still don't see the point.  a vote for your guy is +1, a vote for 
>>> the other guy is -1, and a vote for neither counts for 0.
>>>
>>> whether is Schulze or Tideman or Kemeny–Young or Simpson-Kramer the 
>>> disappointment of the losing voter counts as much (but in the other 
>>> direction) as the satisfaction of the winning voter. vote margins 
>>> are the product of the percent decisiveness times the vote turnout.  
>>> an pairwise election that's virtually tied with a huge turnout might 
>>> not be as indicative of voter intent with a slightly lower turnout 
>>> but a very decisive, creating a larger margin.
>>>
>>>> By asking the right questions and looking at political realities 
>>>> (especially recently) he got us moving in the right direction.
>>>>
>>>> I always appreciated his passionate approach that might have seemed 
>>>> overly combative to some people.
>>>
>>> it wasn't combative that was annoying.  if was being dismissive and 
>>> patronizing.
>>>
>>> sorry to be a curmudgeon.
>>>
>>
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list 
>> info
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list 
> info