[EM] Election-Methods Digest, Vol 207, Issue 29, Debates about MJ

[Forest Simmons]

Steve,

Kristopher is right ... just brainstorming to explore the possibilities
.... how close can we get to compliance with IIAC, Majority Criterion,
Clone Free, Mono-Raise, Mono-Add, FBC, etc.

Later, we will pare it down and fluff it up to a simple, attractive, user
friendly format like MJ's current incarnation.

The main reason that MJ is not compliant with Reverse Symmetry is that its
designers could not come up with a  good symmetrical rule for breaking
ties... theirs is a pretty good rule, if you don't care about symmetry  ...
and accommodating symmetry as much as possible is not easy .... you cannot
blame them for settling on something suboptimal.

If you want to help, work on generic verbal descriptions of four distinct
levels of evil and four distinct levels of good ...
short, pithy, memorable phrases that encapsulate the qualities of bad and
good candidates ... something like "incompetent and corrupt," on one end of
the spectrum, and "honest and wise" on the other. Don't be afraid of using
judgmental words ... after all, we're talking "Majority Judgment." But
avoid inflammatory words ... corrupt is borderline inflammatory, so find a
better word!

When you have perfected an eight level symmetrical scale for human
alternatives, start working on a generic scale for inanimate choices that
must be voted on ...  say from "beastly" to "droll" ... I know you can do
better than that!


El lun., 18 de oct. de 2021 11:10 a. m., Kristofer Munsterhjelm <
km_elmet at t-online.de> escribió:

> On 18.10.2021 19:52, steve bosworth wrote:
> >
> >
> > TO: Forest
> >
> > FROM: Steve (stevebosworth at hotmail.com)
> >
> > Below, Forest offers what seems to me to be a strange and unintelligible
> > suggestion which is supposed to relate to my current support of MJ. Is
> > this suggestion just a playful in joke that I do not understand, or
> > please explain its serious relevance to debates about the virtues of MJ?
>
> He's basically saying "MJ is good, but it fails reversal symmetry and
> participation. Can we make a method that does what MJ does, but also
> passes reversal symmetry and participation?"
>
> It's not (as I would see it, at least) a practical proposal, but he's
> exploring whether it is at all possible.
>
> -km
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20211018/f63188b8/attachment.html>