<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:12px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54437"><span>Hi Jameson,</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54436"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54434">MCA (the one with three slots) has the simpler description surely? If there's a majority preferred, elect the most preferred; else elect the most approved (least disapproved).</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_55696">There is another method where you elect the approval winner unless there are multiple candidates with a majority, in which case preferred ratings break the "tie."</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56101">Your earlier message says "The winner is the non-disqualified candidate with the most approvals" but I assume this should say "most preferred."</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56102">So you are saying if nobody manages to get majority approval, you will only be using the top ratings and ignoring "acceptable" ratings? That is unusual; my instinct is that if we can't find a majority we should try to find votes to get as close as possible. There's a risk that you are collecting enough information to permit concluding e.g. that a simultaneous approval and Condorcet winner lost.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56103">I don't see why you are making rules for unmarked candidates if your intended advantage is simplicity. I believe you explained why you have this to somebody else, so I won't ask you to repeat, but I wonder about the effect of the sentence that starts "And second." You're saying that if A has majority preferred+acceptable, but is not top two on preferred ratings, to count blanks as disapproved in hopes that this might remove A's majority approval (or rather, non-disapproval)? Aside from the weird Clone-Loser issue in having a top-two rule on a ratings ballot, it feels a little schizophrenic to me that you really want winners to have majority non-disapproval yet do not actually think it indicates a worthy candidate.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56598">I tend to think we will be lucky if we can consistently get even one majority non-disapproved candidate in elections. In a U/P race with two major candidates, one of those is basically guaranteed to get the label penalty in the next race.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54435" dir="ltr"><span>Kevin</span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54433"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54401" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54400"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54399"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54398"> <font size="2" face="Arial" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54432"> <hr size="1" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56311"> <b id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56379"><span style="font-weight:bold;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56378">De :</span></b> Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn@gmail.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">À :</span></b> EM <election-methods@lists.electorama.com>; electionsciencefoundation <electionscience@googlegroups.com> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Envoyé le :</span></b> Mercredi 7 septembre 2016 12h59<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Objet :</span></b> Re: [EM] U/P voting: new name for simple 3-level method.<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54470"><br><div id="yiv9646341727"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54472"><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54471">The main advantage of U/P voting over other systems like MJ or MCA is simplicity of description. So I'm going to try to describe it as simply as possible.<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54473"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54474">To vote, you rate each person running as "preferred", "acceptable", or "unacceptable". You can rate any number at each level.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54475"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_54476">If more than half of voters rate a person "unacceptable", that person can't win, unless the same is true of all the people running. Of those remaining, the winner is the one rated "preferred" by the most voters.</div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56471"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56654">If you leave all three ratings blank for a candidate, that usually means the same as rating them "acceptable". There are two exceptions. First, if you made a mark to rate some candidates "acceptable", then the ones you didn't make any mark for are counted as "unacceptable". And second, if the two most-preferred candidates both can't win, because more than half of voters marked them "unacceptable", then candidates with no mark count as "unacceptable". That way, you don't end up letting a weak candidate win by mistake.</div></div><div class="yiv9646341727gmail_extra" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56240"><br clear="none"><div class="yiv9646341727gmail_quote" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56241">2016-09-06 13:17 GMT-04:00 Jameson Quinn <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:jameson.quinn@gmail.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:jameson.quinn@gmail.com">jameson.quinn@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br clear="none"><div class="yiv9646341727yqt8693203560" id="yiv9646341727yqt22292"><blockquote class="yiv9646341727gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56243"><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56242">I've recently posted a few messages discussing a simple 3-level graded Bucklin method:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Ballot: For each candidate, you may rate them “preferred”, “acceptable”, or “unacceptable”. Any candidate, including an incumbent, who had gotten over 50% "unacceptable" in the prior election would have a note to that effect next to their name on the ballot. (In prior messages, I'd suggested not allowing them on the ballot. I now think that allowing them on, but with a note, would be better.)<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56709"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1473280194594_56710">Counting: For the current eIection, if some but not all candidates have a majority (50%+1) of “unacceptable” votes, then they are disqualified. The winner is the non-disqualified candidate with the most approvals. <div><br clear="none"></div><div>My new name for the above system is U/P voting. It stands for "unacceptable/preferred", and can be pronounced "up voting" for quick discussion; or "you pee voting" if necessary to avoid confusion.</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div><br clear="none"></div></div></div><br><div class="yqt8693203560" id="yqt95379">----<br clear="none">Election-Methods mailing list - see <a shape="rect" href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em </a>for list info<br clear="none"></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>