[EM] High5 voting (~ Smith//Approval on a reduced set)

[C.Benham]

> >/I prefer Smith//Condorcet, but accept that that is more complex to />/explain and sell and probably the most approved candidate />/will nearly always be in the voted Smith set. /
> Do you mean Smith//Approval?

Kristofer,

Yes!

Thanks for asking.

Chris B.


> *Kristofer Munsterhjelm*km_elmet at t-online.de 
> <mailto:election-methods%40lists.electorama.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BEM%5D%20High5%20voting%20%28%7E%20Smith//Approval%20on%20a%20reduced%20set%29&In-Reply-To=%3C8e9ac208-f214-9a99-b8b7-23dc18dea22b%40t-online.de%3E>
> /Sat Dec 16 06:12:57 PST 2023/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 2023-12-16 13:44, C.Benham wrote:
> >//>/Why do at least several US Americans here think there is something />/problematic and/or weird about allowing both quite />/a large number of candidates on the ballot and voters to strictly rank />/exactly as many of them as they wish? />//
> I guess it's partly that some US locations do this de facto anyway (e.g.
> some places using IRV only lets the voters rank three candidates). And I
> *think* that's due to legacy hardware? Optical scan machines that can
> only read bubbles, and mechanical ones that can only read a certain
> number of holes.
>
> I'm not sure, though.
>
> >/I prefer Smith//Condorcet, but accept that that is more complex to />/explain and sell and probably the most approved candidate />/will nearly always be in the voted Smith set. /
> Do you mean Smith//Approval?
>
> -km
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20231217/0c59e194/attachment-0001.htm>