<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Mike,<br>
<br>
What happened to the Michael Ossipoff who coined the Chicken
Dilemma criterion?<br>
<br>
It seems to me that your argument here for Approval applies
equally well to any method that meets FBC and for which<br>
the voter's best strategy to elect a member of hir "top set" is
vote them all equal-top and the rest all equal-bottom <br>
(and if they all do that the result will be the same as Approval).<br>
<br>
But if some voters are willing to take some strategic risk for the
sake of being more expressive, or they are more certain of<br>
their ranking than the location of their approval threshold, I
don't see why they shouldn't be indulged.<br>
<br>
In view of my sentence before last, I'm puzzled by the inclusion
of "Plain Bucklin" (that doesn't allow equal-ranking) on your <br>
list of "best rank methods".<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 9/7/2016 4:14 AM, <font face="Calibri">Michael Ossipoff </font>wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:ixqgpmndwvosd1cdl2syfvf1.1473187441232@email.android.com"
type="cite">
<style>@font-face{font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}</style><font
face="Calibri">
<p dir="ltr"><br>
For anyone, there exists a set of candidates such that, for
that person, electing from that set is more important than the
matter of _which_ member of that set wins.</p>
<p dir="ltr">That is hir "operational top-set".</p>
<p dir="ltr">Also, there's a set of candidates who are so close
to you<span style="color: #1f497d;"> that you perceive them as
</span>th<span style="color: #1f497d;">e</span> very best,
whom you really like & completely trust--what you really
want.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I'll call that your "best top-set".</p>
<p dir="ltr">When I say " top-set " or "favorites", I mean
operational top-set, with the understanding that I suggest
that your operational top-set should consist of your best
top-set.</p>
<p dir="ltr">...instead of including some dismal pessimistic
compromise like Hillary.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Your "bottom-set" consists of everyone who isn't in
your top-set.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Approval's 2-valued ratings perfectly match the
candidates' 2 important categories (top-set & bottom-set).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Approving your top-set maximizes the probability of
electing from your top-set.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Approval is the method that asks the relevant
question.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Based in the above, it _is_ possible to objectively
say what the best method is. It's Approval.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Yes, people want to vote not only _for_ their
top-set--they want to also vote _among_ their top-set.</p>
<p dir="ltr">In other words, they want it all.</p>
<p dir="ltr">That's too much to ask of a voting-system. You'll
increase the probability of electing from your bottom-set.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><span style="color: #1f497d;">If</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">you're</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">
concerned that people will </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">over-compromise</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> in Approval, reme</span>mber that, if we ever
even have verifiably-counted (and therefore legitimate)
elections--let alone a better voting-system--that would only
happen in a very different world. ...one in which we'd also
have honest, open, participatory media, free & open public
discussion<span style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">and</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">a</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">well-informed</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">
</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">e</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">!</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">ectorate</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr">In that world, I suggest that your worry is
unfounded.</p>
<p dir="ltr">But a choice of proposal must depend on what voters
and the proposal committee or organization demands.<br>
<span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><br>
And if you want a better voting-system in some municipality,
under current conditions, you might be tempted to use ranking,
to achieve MMC...for something relatively foolproof<span
style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr">But MMC knly benefits voters who are
majority-favored.</p>
<p dir="ltr">A voter is majority-favored if a majority prefer at
least part of hir top-set to everyone else.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Arguably it's more fair without MMC, because it
can't be available for all voters.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Also, because strategy is usually different,
depending on whether you're majority-favore<span style="color:
#1f497d;">, </span>then the safety of your top-set depends
on judging whether you're majority-favored. <span
style="color: #1f497d;">If</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">you</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">aren't</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">sure</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">you're</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">majority</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">-favored</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">you</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">should</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">assume</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">that</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> you </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">aren't</span>...suggesting that
Approval would be better.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><span style="color: #1f497d;">With</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">a</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">rank-method</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">instead</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">of</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">Approval</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">, in </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">general</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">you</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">must</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">accept</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">at</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">least</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">a</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">somewhat</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">greater</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">probability</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">of</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">electing</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">from</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">your</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">bottom</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">-set</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr">But if you choose ranking, then there's no best. No
rank-methods dominates the others.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I suggest that the best rank methods consist of 3
Bucklin versions and MAM. Which to choose depends on what
people insist on, and what kind offensive and defensive
strategy is expected.</p>
<p dir="ltr">3 Bucklin versions: </p>
<p dir="ltr">1. Plain Bucklin:</p>
<p dir="ltr">No equal-ranking or skipping.</p>
<p dir="ltr">2. B or A:</p>
<p dir="ltr">You can vote Plain Bucklin or Approval</p>
<p dir="ltr">3. ER Bucklin:</p>
<p dir="ltr">Equal ranking allowed. No skipping. ...except that
if you equal-rank n candidates in a round, then the count rule
automatically skips n-1 rounds before giving votes at your
next rank.</p>
<p dir="ltr">None of those dominates the others. It depends on
people's demands, expected strategy, and on how daring &
adventurous voters are.</p>
<p dir="ltr">MAM is the method that could offer the safest
sincere-order ranking<span style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">if</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">people</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">avoid</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">ranking</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">below</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">the</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">expected</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">CW</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span style="color: #1f497d;">That</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">deters</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">burial</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">, </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">which</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">would</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">backfire</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"><span style="color: #1f497d;">In </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">Bucklin</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">, </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">too</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">and</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">Approval</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">, </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">it's</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">best</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">to</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">not</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">vote</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">below</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> the </span>expected<span style="color: #1f497d;">
</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">sincere</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">CW</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">. </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">But</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">in</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">MAM</span><span style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">doing</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">so</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">is</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">harmless</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">unless</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">burial</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">is</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">attempted</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr">A few merit comparisons are sure, however:</p>
<p dir="ltr">MJ is nowhere near as good as the Bucklin versions
with MMC and sufficient rating or ranking levels.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><span style="color: #1f497d;">MJ</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">advocates</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">obfuscate</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">it</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> & </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">its</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> strategy,
for </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">themselves</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">, </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">by</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">their</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">non-Bucklin</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span style="color:
#1f497d;">wording</span><span style="color: #1f497d;"> </span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">of</span><span style="color:
#1f497d;"> </span><span style="color: #1f497d;">it</span><span
style="color: #1f497d;">.</span></p>
<p dir="ltr">Michael Ossipoff</p>
</font><br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://electorama.com/em">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<p class="" avgcert""="" color="#000000" align="left">No virus
found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 2016.0.7752 / Virus Database: 4649/12956 - Release
Date: 09/06/16</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>