[EM] Hay guys, look at this...

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 2/17/23 04:46, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
>   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qnSE5wPa1y7k-Y_zblLRwxc2Ol1QmrUs/view?usp=share_link

Nice! Two comments:

- The ballot format allows for equal rank. I'm not familiar with legal 
language, but from the document, it seems like everything needs to be 
precisely described. Thus it might be a good idea to specify how 
equal-rank first preferences are counted: does A=B>C give one point to 
both A and B, or half a point to both?

- There's a chance it would backfire if someone engineers a Condorcet 
cycle. Perhaps better is that the highest Plurality scorer among the 
candidates with the highest number of pairwise wins, wins instead? 
That's Copeland,Plurality and thus Smith.

Of course, if the legislative document is meant to implement 
Condorcet,Plurality specifically (and it's past the "which method do we 
choose" stage), then disregard what I just said and go for 
Condorcet,Plurality - we'll see how it goes :-)

-km