<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Chris Benham wrote:<BR>><I> I have an idea for a FBC complying method that I think is clearly<BR></I>><I> better than the version of "Range Voting" (aka Average Rating or<BR></I>><I> Cardinal Ratings) defined and promoted by CRV.<BR></I>><I> <BR></I>><I> <A href="http://rangevoting.org/"><FONT color=#0000ff>http://rangevoting.org/</FONT></A><BR></I>><I> <BR></I>><I> I suggest that voters use multi-slot ratings ballots that have the bottom<BR></I>><I> slots (at least 2 and not more than half) clearly labelled as expressing<BR></I>><I> "disapproval" and all others as expressing "Approval". The default<BR></I>><I> rating is the bottom-most.<BR></I>><I> <BR></I>><I> Compute each candidate X's Approval score and also "Approval<BR></I>><I> Opposition" score (the approval score of the most approved candidate<BR></I>><I> on
ballots that don't approve X).<BR></I>><I> <BR></I>><I> All candidates whose approval score is exceeded by their approval<BR></I>><I> opposition (AO) score are disqualified. Elect the undisqualified<BR></I>><I> candidate that is highest ordered by Average Rating.<BR></I>><I> <BR></I>><I> I suggest many fewer slots than 99 and no "no opinion" option, so I<BR></I>><I> think the resulting method is not more complex for voters.<BR></I><BR><BR>Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote (Monday, 29 September, 2008):<BR>"One way of making it less complex would be to have a cardinal ratings <BR>(Range) ballot with both positive and negative integers. The voter rates <BR>every candidate, and those candidates that get below zero points are <BR>considered disapproved, while those that get above zero are considered <BR>approved. This idea doesn't specify where those rated at zero (or those <BR>not rated at all) would
appear."<BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR>CB: Thinking about this method idea more, as a practical proposition either</DIV>
<DIV>a very simple way of handling the zero on a scale that includes negative and</DIV>
<DIV>positive numbers or not having a zero would be better.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>One tidy relatively simple version would use a " A B C | D E F" graded ballot</DIV>
<DIV>with ABC shown on the ballot as taken to signify "approved" or "acceptable"</DIV>
<DIV>and DEF not. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This could perhaps be promoted as "Graded Approval". My technical name</DIV>
<DIV>for the method is I suppose "Approval Strong Minimal Defense, CR".</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Chris Benham</DIV></div><br>
<hr size=1> Make the switch to the world's best email.
<a href="http://au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/taglines/au/mail/default/*http://au.yahoo.com/y7mail">Get Yahoo!7 Mail</a>.</body></html>