[EM] High Resolution Inferred Approval version of ASM

Richard Lung voting at ukscientists.com
Mon Jun 24 11:39:46 PDT 2019

Thankyou for asking.
It's standard statistics. I refered to it occasionally over the years.
To give a more representative summary of classes of data, they may be 
weighted. If no accurate information is available, the weights to 
respective classes may be assumed. Hence Borda method fits the 
statistical description, weighting in arithmetic progression. JFS Ross, 
Elections and Electors, 1955, suggested that the weighting would be more 
realistic using the geometric mean. This would be weighting in geometric 
progression. The British broadcaster Robin Day favored weighting in 
harmonic progression!
But the point is they are all assumptions. This is the basic drawback to 
score voting systems.
The other standard statistical phrase is weighting in arithmetic 
proportion, which applies when statisticians have the weighting data for 
the proportionate importance of the classes of data. An example of this 
well-defined count is the Gregory weighting of the total transferable 
vote or alternatively, and more consistently, the Meek method keep values.
Of course, this accurate count does not apply to deficit votes, as well 
as surplus votes for candidates. That is, until FAB STV.

By the way, as far as method of counting is concerned, FAB STV is unlike 
traditional STV in that it does not distinguish between AV and STV, 
because only the latter is PR with potential surplus transfers. 
Consequently, there is no special "single winner method" with FAB STV.
But there is a but, which, without going into details, essentially is JS 
Mill distinction between democracy and maiorocracy.

Richard L.

On 24/06/2019 15:58, Chris Benham wrote:
> Richard L,
> Can you please expand a bit on the meaning and relevance of your 
> profound observation?
> What is your working definition of a "points system"??? (I can perhaps 
> guess from your reference to the Borda method.)
> How is your reference to some variants of the multi-winner?? Single 
> Transferable Vote algorithm relevant to the discussion of a 
> single-winner method?
> Chris Benham
> On 23/06/2019 11:54 pm, Richard Lung wrote:
>> Points systems (Borda method is the archetype) are an assumed 
>> weighting of preferences. Gregory method transfer value or Meek 
>> method keep values are a real weighting of preferences.
>> Richard L.
>> On 20/06/2019 21:03, Forest Simmons wrote:
>>> Chris, I like it especially the part about naive voters voting 
>>> sincerely being at no appreciable disadvantage while resisting 
>>> burial and complying with?? the CD criterion.??
>>> From your experience in Australia where full rankings are required 
>>> (as I understand it) what do you think about the practicality of 
>>> rating on a scale of zero to 99, as compared with ranking a long 
>>> list of candidates??? Is it a big obstacle?
>>> ----
>>> Election-Methods mailing list - seehttps://electorama.com/em  for list info
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - seehttps://electorama.com/em  for list info
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=oa-4885-b> 
> 	Virus-free. www.avg.com 
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=oa-4885-b> 
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list info

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20190624/c667893d/attachment.html>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list