[EM] a method based on candidate separation

[Michael Ossipoff]

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Forest Simmons <fsimmons at pcc.edu> wrote:

> Ross Hyman recently suggested a method that eliminates the pairwise loser
> of the bottom remaining candidates on a list (in his suggestion the list
> was a random ballot order) as long as there remain two or more uneliminated
> candidates.
>

Isn't that Sequential-Paiwise (SP), the method recmmended in Robert's
Rules, and used often in meetings and legislatures?

I recommend SP for meetings where quick show-of-hands voting is desired,
and where amicable conditions exist. For that purpose, I like it because it
meets the Smith Criterion, which implies MMC and Condorcet, especially
useful in an amicable electorate not subject to chicken-dilemma.


>
>
> It got me to thinking that ideally we would eliminate the pairwise loser
> of the two candidates with the most separation in issue space.
>

Yes, interestng suggestion. And that measure of importance of pairwise
defeats could be applied to other methods too, including Condorcet methods.
For example, it suggests a version of MAM that measures defeat-strength by
candidate-separation.

As you point out, candidate-separaton is difficult, but not impossible, to
measure.







>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I don't suggest this as another public proposal, but for use as a standard
> of comparison like MAM, when range style ballots are used.
>
>
Yes, MAM, SP(candidate-separation), or MAM(candidate-separation) could be
used as a comparison-standard, for that pre-election poll, where
comparison-standard-winner is reported, and also is reported the way of
voting that would elect that winner in the binding election's method (e.g.
Benham) at Nash Equilibrium.

Michael Ossipoff



> Forest
>
>
> ----
> 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/20140603/159c86e4/attachment.htm>