[EM] STAR

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 8/12/23 19:04, C.Benham wrote:
> Jameson Quinn used to participate in discussion here.  I am not a fan of 
> his or her ideas on voting methods.
> 
> I am very sceptical about claims that some method is great despite being 
> crap on criterion compliances, based purely on computer simulations.
> 
> I refuse to believe that having fewer criterion compliances is needed 
> for the sake of "greater utility".
> 
> "Condorcet at all cost" and then "ticking off a list of criteria" seems 
> like a fine approach (or at least start) to me.  But some criteria are 
> more desirable than others (and opinions can vary
> on which) and some are incompatible with each other and we can invent or 
> suggest new ones.
> 
>> I do think failing clone independence is quite a black mark against 
>> STAR in any case. One way to fix it is to have the election method 
>> "clone" all the candidates anyway.
> 
> How would it do that?

A possible template could go like this:

1. Take the provided ballots and clone every candidate twice. The clones 
are given the same rating as their respective original candidates by 
every voter.
2. Run the amended ballots through a proportional multiwinner rated 
method; the most natural choice is probably RRV (reweighted range 
voting) because it automatically picks the Range winner as the first 
member. Select two finalists (seats) this way.
3. If the two finalists are clones of the same candidate, then that 
candidate wins. Otherwise the pairwise winner of the two wins.

Other methods could be used to choose the finalists. For instance, I 
*think* this one is cloneproof, but I haven't verified it: do a KP 
transform, select the first finalist to be the Range winner, and then 
the second finalist to be, based on the post-transform Approval ballots, 
the candidate who is approved most often on ballots that don't approve 
of the winner.

I also think that STAR's clone problem is particularly severe, because 
it's so obvious and would be possible to exploit in just about any 
election. But it's hard to make something that preserves the "STAR-ness" 
without being too ugly.

-km