[EM] Hybrid ranking/approval ballots

[Richard Lung]

Pluses and minuses cancel out each others information

It is possible to have an exclusion count without cancel of the election 
count.

Regards,

Richard Lung.



On 08/08/2023 01:33, Forest Simmons wrote:
> I totally support the conventions suggested by Chris.
>
> For grade ballots I suggest refinement of rankings by using pluses and 
> minuses like many schools do.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 6, 2023, 12:13 PM C.Benham <cbenham at adam.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>     I'm attracted to a couple of Condorcet methods that allow voters
>     to rank
>     the candidates and also give an approval threshold.
>
>     I think an important question is what should be the default
>     placement of
>     this approval threshold.  I've read from one or two
>     people that all candidates "ranked in any position" should be
>     considered
>     approved, meaning that a ballot that strictly ranks
>     all the candidates by putting a number next to all of them should
>     count
>     as strategically useless approval for all the candidates
>     while a ballot that does the same thing by putting a number next
>     to all
>     but one of them counts as approving all but the unmarked
>     candidate.
>
>     I find that silly and unnecessarily unfair to naive or careless
>     voters,
>     so instead in the past I have gone with "voted above at least one
>     candidate".
>
>     Since the approvals are only used to complete Condorcet it is likely
>     that most of the time they'll have no effect and so many voters won't
>     bother giving an explicit approval cutoff.
>
>     In that circumstance with either the "voted above at least one
>     candidate" or the "ranked in any position" rules, the outcome of the
>     election
>     could be affected by the addition or removal of candidates that
>     all (or
>     nearly all) of the voters hate.
>
>     I find that also silly and unacceptable.  So now I am strongly of the
>     view that default approval should be only of "voted below no other
>     candidate".
>
>     Condorcet methods with no Push-over incentive should allow
>     above-bottom
>     ranking.
>
>     The ballot rules should allow voters to strictly rank however many
>     candidates they like and also (if the method has some use for
>     approval
>     information)
>     to approve only one candidate or all but one or any number in between.
>
>     Hopefully this should all sound obvious. But several people here have
>     been tolerant or (even supportive) of alternatives.
>
>     Someone who proposed a Condorcet completed by Approval method
>     suggested
>     that a 6-slot grading ballot would be fine and that we would
>     arbitrarily
>     call the top 3 slots approval and the bottom 3 not.
>
>     If there are more than 4 candidates that isn't enough to allow the
>     voter
>     to strictly rank all the candidates and approve only one or
>     all-but-one.
>
>     In principle a grading or multi-slot rating ballot with the top
>     half of
>     the slots/grades signifying approval is fine as long as there are at
>     least as many
>     slots/grades as twice the number of candidates, minus one.
>
>     Another abomination is compulsory ranking. This is "GIGO" (garbage
>     in,
>     garbage out) and I find it analogous to compelled speech.
>
>     In Australia, the major parties'  "How-to-Vote" cards usually just
>     advise their supporters to after writing a "1" next to their party's
>     candidate just to
>     number all the rest according to the order they appear on the
>     ballot paper.
>
>     Chris Benham
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - seehttps://electorama.com/em  for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20230808/c4edee5f/attachment-0001.htm>