<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
I also have found it hard to believe that Score voting and Approval
voting are taken seriously. <br>
There is a tradition of cumulative voting in one of the states,
that, not surprisingly, would not have compared badly with FPTP.<br>
An American political science association uses Approval Voting. I
take that choice in itself to be a form of strategic voting. Neither
looking too bad with FPTP, nor looking too good, in the eyes of
(gerrymandering) politicians.<br>
<br>
Richard Lung.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 23/06/2017 17:09, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:423b701e22d2f4b51491ea3f38f602de.squirrel@webmail04.register.com"
type="cite">
<p><br>
<br>
---------------------------- Original Message
----------------------------<br>
Subject: Re: [EM] The election methods trade-off
paradox/impossibility theorems paradox.<br>
From: "Brian Olson" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bql@bolson.org"><bql@bolson.org></a><br>
Date: Fri, June 23, 2017 8:35 am<br>
To: "EM" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com"><election-methods@lists.electorama.com></a><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
> I was speaking only of ballots, and and in the abstract
that *some* election<br>
> algorithm could take that information and make a good
outcome of it.</p>
<p>No, we should not make the voters cook up that information.
all we should ask the voters is "whom do you prefer A or B?"
and "if you can't get your favorite, whom is your next
preference?"</p>
<p><br>
> I don't favor raw Score summation. It's strategy prone.</p>
<p>of course it is. scoring is strategy prone if you use the
scores in *any* algorithm other than simple ranking. and then
don't use scores. just rank.</p>
<p><br>
> For choices where<br>
> my honest vote might be [1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2, 0.0] I
should probably<br>
> vote strategically [1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0].</p>
<p>but then you're not helping your first choice beat your second
or third choice.</p>
<p><br>
><br>
> And if you don't like that and the varying vote power
depending on how you<br>
> vote: I have a system for you!<br>
> "Instant Runoff Normalized Ratings" (IRNR)<br>
> Each ballot is normalized so that all ballots have the same
magnitude.<br>
<br>
pfffft! way too complicated.<br>
<br>
> The<br>
> modified ballots are summed, and the choice with the lowest
sumarry rating<br>
> is disqualified. Each ballot is then normalized again as if
the<br>
> disqualified choice was not there, redistributing the vote
across the<br>
> choices in proportion to the original ballot. The new
modified ballots are<br>
> summed and the process is repeated until there are two
choices remaining<br>
> and one choice wins over the other.<br>
><br>
> I think this works better with an honest ballot in the case
where you like<br>
> some choice more than another 'just a little bit' or by
whatever margin.<br>
</p>
<p>no reason to use that over Condorcet (with a simple method to
deal with cycles, ranked-pairs is still a lot easier to explain
than Schulze and they pick the same winner if there are 3 in the
Smith set, so let's use the simpler method)</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>
--</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>
r b-j <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com">rbj@audioimagination.com</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."</p>
<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>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Richard Lung.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.voting.ukscientists.com">http://www.voting.ukscientists.com</a>
Democracy Science series 3 free e-books in pdf:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://plus.google.com/106191200795605365085">https://plus.google.com/106191200795605365085</a>
E-books in epub format:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/democracyscience">https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/democracyscience</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>