[EM] POLL: Ballots and results

[Richard Lung]

I noticed you used a points system to count the votes in your ballot. 
This is characteristic of non-proportional counts. In statistics, it is 
the difference between weighting in arithmetic progression (akin to 
Borda method) and weighting in arithmetic proportion (akin to Gregory 
method). The former is only used when a guess or estimate has to be made 
of the latter, in weighting classes of data.

Proportional counting is more accurate. But mathematics has become 
politicised by the Machine, particularly in their ruthless routing of 
all but Cambridgecity elections. (A similar political spirit has kept 
Kris Maharaj, an innocent man, in a Floridajail, since the early 
nineteen eighties.)

  Furthermore, the use of which voting method, to count a ballot on 
voting methods, has already decided the best available option. But a 
conventional count of single-member systems cannot use the best 
available method.

However this does involve preference voting or ranked choice voting, 
which is a rebuff to single-preference votes or the stub vote, commonly 
called “the vote.”Voting for one-choice preferences, in a 
many-preference ballot, is as much to say that personal opinion 
over-rules the realities of the matter.

This is in flat contradiction to the HG Wells statement, that voting 
methods, like anything else, are capable of scientific (knowledgeable) 
treatment. Voting method is not a matter of opinion but a matter of 
demonstration. It is demonstrated that the vote is an ordinal vote, not 
least by the denunciation of “wasted votes,” and the urging of 
tactical/strategic voting.

Regards,

Richard Lung.



On 19/05/2024 17:40, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> On 2024-05-18 21:20, Toby Pereira wrote:
>> Thanks for doing this Kristofer. If I counted correctly Ranked Pairs 
>> beat Benham 5-4 with two ties, so not a particularly significant 
>> result in that respect. But it must have had at least two more 
>> approvals given that Minmax is between them.
>
> That's a good point - I should post the Approval counts too :-)
>
> Here they are:
>
> Ranked Pairs (wv)                    8
> Minmax (wv)                          7
> Benham                               6
> STAR                                 6
> Woodall                              6
> Approval                             5
> Approval with manual runoff          4
> Margins-Sorted Approval              4
> Schulze                              4
> Schwartz Woodall                     3
> Smith//Approval (explicit)           3
> Smith//Approval (implicit)           3
> Smith//Score                         3
> Baldwin                              2
> BTR-IRV (write-in)                   2
> Condorcet//Borda (Black)             2
> Condorcet//Plurality (write-in)      2
> Copeland//Borda (Ranked Robin)       2
> Double Defeat, Hare                  2
> IRV                                  2
> Majority Judgement                   1
> Margins-Sorted Minimum Losing Votes  1
> Max Strength Transitive Beatpath     1
> Raynaud                              1
> RCIPE                                1
> Score (write-in)                     1
> Smith//DAC                           1
> Borda (write-in)                     0
> Plurality                            0
>
> -km
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list 
> info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240520/27634acd/attachment.htm>