[EM] Manipulability stats for more poll methods (fixed footnotes)

[Michael Ossipoff]

On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 04:17 Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
wrote:

> On 2024-05-05 00:25, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 4, 2024 at 14:45 Kristofer Munsterhjelm
> > <km_elmet at t-online.de <mailto:km_elmet at t-online.de>> wrote:
> >
>
>
> Let min be the minimum utility (the utility of your worst candidate),
> and max be the utility of your favorite. Then the normalized ratings
> from 0 to k inclusive are given by
>
> r_i = round( (x_i - min)/(max-min) * k), where x_i is the utility of the
> ith candidate, and r_i is the rating of that candidate.
>
> I thought this was the natural way to create Range ballots from
> utilities.


Of course. That’s surely the only way to portray  sincere  Score-voting in
a spatial-simulation.

What threw me was when in a reply to Chris, demonstrated it on
Approval—which made it look as if you’d used it to model Approval voting.

Misunderstood resolved.

Necessary for simulations, but I didn’t vote like that in the Score
elections I’ve voted in.

(We always used to have ranked, Approval & Score balloting in the EM polls,
& I voted in a Score poll a month or two ago…& we’re always being asked to
rate things Cardinal my.)

Surveys ask for *absolute* Cardinal-ratings, from excellent to awful.

That’s how I’ve always voted in political Score polls to.

Yes, EVC says to give max to best & min to worst in STAR…as optimal
immediate instrumental strategy requires. …& requires in Approval too.

But c’mon now! In an election with only Joe & Donald are you going to
approve Joe or vote for him in Plurality? Hell no!

…boycott the election? Maybe, but it would be a lot more expressive to
turn/on a ballot disapproving both.

What if Jill & Cornell are the only candidates. Their policies differ a
little. Maybe you prefer one’s platform to the other’s. Do you disapprove
one inApproval? No way !!






To my knowledge, there's no obvious way to generalize
> above-mean utility thresholding to say, a 0-10 scale.
>
> I'm aware that "normalize" as I've defined it above is different from
> above-mean thresholding, and that the latter is more common in
> treatments of approval voting in particular. For that reason, I use mean
> utility cutoffs for the approval hybrids, and range-based normalization
> for the Range hybrids. My point was just that one shouldn't confuse the
> two and think I used the same approach for approval and Range.
>
> -km
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240505/90a19065/attachment.htm>