[EM] Express any wish for democratic choice of poll-parameters. Do-able if desired.

[Michael Ossipoff]

Oh, another ballot-addition that I forgot to add:

In. case anyone specifies STAR, my STAR-ballot:

Alternative #1: 5 stars
Alternative #2: 0 stars
Alternative #3: 5 stars

On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:45 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Typo-correction:
>
> Here is what I meant to write in this paragraph.
>
> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method *whose
> winner* you’re counted as approving down to…in the base-method, which is
> Approval.
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:32 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I should add, to my hypothetical  Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3
>> alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people
>> specify Approval:
>>
>> Approval set:
>>
>> {Alternative #1, Alternative #3}
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the
>>> simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal.
>>>
>>> I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested
>>> Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite
>>> Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular.
>>>
>>> So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM.
>>>
>>> But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite
>>> has changed.
>>>
>>> Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as
>>> desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE.
>>>
>>> A few people have suggested different methods for the polling.
>>> Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people
>>> so desire.
>>>
>>> All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this
>>> thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on
>>> the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with
>>> only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote
>>> now.
>>>
>>> So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s
>>> voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish,
>>> because it’s easily do-able.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose,
>>>
>>> …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2
>>> possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze
>>> predominant).
>>>
>>> The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1.
>>>
>>> Alternative # 2:
>>>
>>> I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long,
>>> requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one.
>>>
>>> Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if
>>> desired.
>>>
>>> To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones,
>>> could be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes.
>>>
>>> What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long
>>> popularity here.
>>>
>>> There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2.
>>>
>>> Alternative #3:
>>>
>>> A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s
>>> Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which
>>> to start:
>>>
>>> Voter’s Choice:
>>>
>>> Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll;
>>>
>>> & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1
>>> or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods
>>> require different balloting.
>>>
>>> e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, &
>>> Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if
>>> you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the
>>> option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot
>>> (for Smith//Score).  But you needn’t add those others unless you want to.
>>>
>>> What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts
>>> a Score-ballot?
>>>
>>> No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that
>>> ballot + method-specification is counted:
>>>
>>> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that
>>> you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval.
>>>
>>> Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW.
>>>
>>> So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends on
>>> the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method.
>>>
>>> Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate
>>> “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want
>>> to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted.
>>>
>>> So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his
>>> top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as
>>> approving down to his top-scored candidate.
>>>
>>> If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing
>>> arbitrary or unexpected.
>>>
>>> It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require
>>> any agreement on a method for counting the poll.
>>>
>>> That’s Alternative #3.
>>>
>>> If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote,
>>> immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote
>>> on that immediately.
>>>
>>> …by what method?
>>>
>>> Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice.
>>>
>>> Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍
>>>
>>> I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who
>>> wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then
>>> proceed with it.
>>>
>>> I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that route,
>>> that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with Schulze &
>>> Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course it should
>>> be.
>>>
>>> In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my
>>> ballot for that vote:
>>>
>>> If it’s to be counted by Schulze:
>>>
>>> 1. Alternative #1
>>> 2. Alternative #3
>>> 3. Alternative #2
>>>
>>> (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). )
>>>
>>> If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice:
>>>
>>> Specified method: MinMax(wv)
>>>
>>> Ranking:
>>>
>>> 1. Alternative #1
>>> 2. Alternative #3
>>> 3. Alternative #2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240408/1af745c3/attachment.htm>