[EM] Fw: (2) Majority Judgment v. RCIPE (Richard Lung)

[steve bosworth]

________________________________
From: steve bosworth <stevebosworth at hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 1:47 PM
To: Richard Lung <voting at ukscientists.com>
Subject: Re: [EM] (2) Majority Judgment v. RCIPE (Richard Lung)

>From Steve to Richard and Kristofer:
I understand Kristofer to be correct when saying MJ's six grades ar ordinal. However, they are also more than ordinal. As Balinski correctly explains, they also enable citizens more meaningfully to express their judgments about the suitability of the different candidates for office. They communicate more evaluative information both about the voters and the candidates than mere numbers.
Richard, I would prefer to say that while math is based on logic, logic is not equal to math. This is because logic also includs many more thinking activities than math, e.g. inferring some practical consequences of following a moral principle.
Also, you might like to consider how Balinski’s six grades can also be used by voters to elect at-large the whole legislative body. My co-authors and I published the details of such a method in January 2020. It is called evaluative proportional representation (EPR) and it guarantees that each citizen’s vote proportionally increases the voting power in the legislative body of the elected candidate for whom the citizen’s vote is counted, i.e. the citizen’s “highest possible grade” increases the weighted vote in the assembly of that winner, more exactly, either the highest grade given by the voter, their remaining highest grade, or their proxy vote. In this sense, no citizen’s vote is needlessly “diluted”, ignored, or wasted as is sometimes the case with every existing or alternative voting method for electing multi-winners as far as I can see.
What do you think?
Steve






________________________________
From: Richard Lung <voting at ukscientists.com>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 10:14 AM
To: Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
Cc: steve bosworth <stevebosworth at hotmail.com>; election-methods at lists.electorama.com <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
Subject: Re: [EM] Majority Judgment v. RCIPE version 2 (Richard Lung)


KM,
Yes, but it's like saying that math is founded on logic, so isn't logic mathematical?
The scales of measurement are a progression.
RL.

On 15 Aug 2021, at 8:39 pm, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de> wrote:

> On 15.08.2021 20:59, Richard Lung wrote:
>
>
> Thank you, Steve,
> What I think is what others have already said, namely that a scale of
> category grades is a step back from an ordinal scale. On the four scales
> of measurement given by S S Stevens (in Science, in the 1940s) the
> classificatory or categorical scale is the least powerful or accurate.
> The ordinal scale is a step up in precision. (The interval and ratio
> scales come next.) The power of the ratio scale  can replace majority
> counts with proportional counts (if done reasonably well as in
> Cambridge, Mass.)
> Regards,
> Richard Lung.

The grades in MJ are equipped with an order (e.g. "Excellent" is better
than "Good"), so aren't MJ grades also ordinal?

-km
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20210816/c56e6e0a/attachment.html>