<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="RIGHT: auto">Robert Bristow-Johnson wrote (1 Oct 2012):<BR><BR>"my spin is similar. Ranked Pairs simply says that some "elections" (or <BR>"runoffs") speak more loudly than others. those with higher margins are <BR>more definitive in expressing the will of the electorate than elections <BR>with small margins. of course, a margin of zero is a tie and this says <BR>*nothing* regarding the will of the electorate, since it can go either way.<BR><BR>the reason i like margins over winning votes is that the margin, in vote <BR>count, is the product of the margin as a percent (that would be a <BR>measure of the decisiveness of the electorate) times the total number of <BR>votes (which is a measure of how important the election is). so the <BR>margin in votes is the product of salience of the race times
how <BR style="RIGHT: auto">decisive the decision is."<BR style="RIGHT: auto"></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto">Say there are 3 candidates and the voters have the option to fully rank them,<BR>but instead they all just choose to vote FPP-style thus:</div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><BR> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">49: A<BR>48: B<BR>03: C</div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">Of course the only possible winner is A. Now say the election is held again (with<BR>the same voters and candidates), and the B voters change to B>C giving:<BR><BR></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">49: A<BR>48: B>C<BR>03: C<BR></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><BR style="RIGHT: auto">Now to my mind this change adds strength to no candidate other than C, so the winner <BR>should either stay the same or change to C. Does anyone disagree?</div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">So how do you (Robert or whoever the cap fits) justify to the A voters (and any fair-minded </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">person not infatuated with the Margins pairwise algorithm) that the new Margins winner is B??</div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">The pairwise comparisons: B>C 48-3, C>A 51-49, A>B 49-48.<BR style="RIGHT: auto"></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto">Ranked Pairs(Margins) gives the order B>C>A. <BR><BR>I am happy with either A or C winning, but a win for C might look odd to people accustomed<BR>to FPP and/or IRV.<BR></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">*If* we insist on a Condorcet method that uses only information contained in the pairwise<BR>matrix (and so ignoring all positional or "approval" information) then *maybe* "Losing Votes"</div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">is the best way to weigh the pairwise results. (So the strongest pairwise results are those where<BR>the loser has the fewest votes and, put the other way, the weakest results are those where the</div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto">loser gets the most votes).<BR style="RIGHT: auto"></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto" class=ms__id33635><VAR id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR>In the example Losing Votes elects A. Winning Votes elects C which I'm fine with, but I don't<BR>like Winning Votes for other reasons.<BR><BR>Chris Benham<BR></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"> </div></div></body></html>