<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hi all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sorry about not reading ALL your mails. It
could happen that the question I'm going to ask has already be
processed...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>... But since english is not my mother tongue and
since you write much ;-) and since there is only 24h in a day and since blah
blah blah ;-) ...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'd like to have your opinion about an idea concerning <FONT
face=Arial size=2>the impact of voting for multiple people :</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In any approval-like system, where you can give your voice to more than one
candidate, you have a problem since giving voices to multiple
candidate raises the weight of vote. Especially if a group of voters give
their voice to the same specific group of candidates, the will drasticly raise
the chances of all their vote to match with other voters who didn't arrange with
them.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So, why not evaluate the amount of information (let's call it
[I]) contained in a vote, and weight this vote by 1/[I] !?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>first idea : let's give the value 1 to each approval to a candidate and 0
for others. the vote will then be a set of 1 and zero, for wich we can
compute the average, variance and standart deviation. Let's use standard
deviation for [I] and each vote by 1/[I].</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>this reduces impact of explicit arrangement, but not for implicit
arrangements : let's call implicit arrangement, the fact that a well known
has more chances than others to accumulate random votes, so
people voting for them will have more chances to match other voters.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>second idea : instead of using each approval and disapproval, let's count
them as many times as the count of votes received by the candidate to compute
the standard deviation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have attached a small excel simulation but I'm not sure it will
be accepted on the mailing list.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>procedure : </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>for each voter [i], for each candidate [j], the voter chooses [Vij] to
approve ([Vij] = 1) or not ([Vij] = 0) the candidate.</DIV>
<DIV>then, for one candidate, let's call </DIV>
<DIV> [Sj], the sum of [Vij] for
all voters [i].</DIV>
<DIV>and [S] is the sum of [Sj] for all candidates [j].</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>then, for one voter [i], let's call </DIV>
<DIV> [AVGi] the average of [Vij], each [Vij] counting [Sj]
times. ( [AVGi] = SUM( [Sj]*[Vij] ) / [S] )</DIV>
<DIV> [VARi] the variance of [Vij], each [Vij] counting [Sj]
times. ( [VARi] = SUM( [Sj] * ([Vij]-[AVGi])^2 ) / [S] )</DIV>
<DIV>
( or [VARi] = SUM( [Sj]*[Vij]^2 ) / [S] -
[AVGi]^2 )</DIV>
<DIV>(where ^2 means squared)</DIV>
<DIV> [SDVi] the standard deviation of [Vij]. ([SDVi] = Square
Root([VARi]);</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>so each votes are weighted with 1/[SDVi] and each candidate receives
SUM([Vij]/[SDVi])</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>