[EM] [CES #15276] Re: PAR: nearly-equivalent rules

[Jameson Quinn]

Nevin's proposed method is pretty good, but it suffers from a slippery
slope problem in a chicken dilemma scenario.

2016-11-14 17:54 GMT-05:00 Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky <
nevin.brackettrozinsky at gmail.com>:

> How about something like this:
>
> 1. Voters indicate whether they Prefer, Accept, or Reject each candidate.
> 2. Identify the candidate with the most Prefer votes, call them P.
> 3. Identify the candidate with the most Accept-or-better votes, call them
> Q.
> 4. Elect the head-to-head winner between P and Q.
>
> For step 4, this means to count the number of ballots which rate P ahead
> of Q, and vice versa, and elect whichever is higher up on more ballots.
>
> Essentially, this method looks at the ballots and says, “We know who the
> most voters prefer, and we know who the most voters accept, but which of
> them should win? Hey, I know, we can let the votes decide!”
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Center for Election Science" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to electionscience+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20161114/7b81479a/attachment.htm>