[EM] (6) MJ -- The easiest method to 'tolerate'

[Jameson Quinn]

>
>  15 candidates, 5 of whom you would honestly value above Poor (e.g. 1
> Excellent, 2 Very Good, 1 Good, and 1 Acceptable.
>

I believe a voter should calibrate their rating scale more or less as the
other voters do, with regard to the distribution of historical winners; and
that that will probably mean that under half of historical winners should
rate at bottom. That might mean that in any given election, over half of
candidates rate at bottom, but I think that 10 out of 15 at bottom
indicates a too-uncompromising rating scale.

(Note that this is not about breaking IIA by recalibrating the rating scale
based on the candidates in a given election, but rather a simple one-time
calibration to history.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20160922/d86f30a1/attachment.htm>