<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 24/05/2019 12:59, Richard Lung
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b795efdb-904b-c743-6fbc-e0b6029469cc@ukscientists.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">In theory, FAB STV is an RCV system
that is based on keep values, as operated by Meek Method STV.
The difference is that the former system gives keep values for
unelected, as well as elected, candidates. Elected candidates
have keep values of one or less. So, candidates with no votes or
preferences whatsoever would have keep values of infinity.</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:b795efdb-904b-c743-6fbc-e0b6029469cc@ukscientists.com">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">This is not so bad as it sounds. In
fact it makes no difference to the counting procedure. If you
wanted to avoid the infinities, then candidates would be allowed
to vote for themselves, ensuring a minimum one vote. This would
give the candidate a keep value that is the same as the value of
the quota (being the quota divided by one vote).</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">from</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Richard Lung.<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 24/05/2019 00:30, robert
bristow-johnson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ec395ede66e8f47e068dd3b8f3ee0e77.squirrel@webmail04.register.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<p> </p>
<p>I think all unranked candidates are tied for last place, no?
Are there any variants of RCV that this is different?</p>
<p>Whether equally-ranked candidates are counted as votes for
*both* candidates or for *neither* candidates cannot make a
difference for Margins. But it seems to me that it makes a
difference if Winning Votes is the measure of defeat strength.</p>
<p>regrads,</p>
<p>r b-j</p>
<p><br>
<br>
---------------------------- Original Message
----------------------------<br>
Subject: Re: [EM] Defeat strength, Winning Votes vs. Margins,
what to do with equal-ranks on the ballot?<br>
From: Stéphane Rouillon <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:stephane.rouillon@sympatico.ca"
moz-do-not-send="true"><stephane.rouillon@sympatico.ca></a><br>
Date: Thu, May 23, 2019 4:24 pm<br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br>
Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">election-methods@lists.electorama.com</a><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
> All criterias (Winning Votes, Margins, Relative Margins)
have advantages and are acceptable. The fine choice depends on
the interpretation you told voters that would be made of blank
ballots. If a blank rank means "all bad", WV is perfect. If it
means "all the same" Margin is good, and if it means "I don't
know but I trust other voters to express a valid opinion about
this option", then RM is perfect. Just tell voters the chosen
interpretation of blank tanks in advance so they can fill a
sincere ballot...<br>
><br>
> Envoyé de mon iPhone<br>
><br>
>> Le 22 mai 2019 à 20:18, robert bristow-johnson <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><rbj@audioimagination.com></a>
a écrit :<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> i'm posting this to the list. i hope it's okay.<br>
>><br>
>> i had been asked:<br>
>><br>
>> > This "plausible example" you can think of, why
don't you show it to us?<br>
>><br>
>> i'm not as good as you guys in dreaming up the number
of ballots ranked however:<br>
>><br>
>> ex. A>B>C>D<br>
>><br>
>> but could you have a defeat matrix where<br>
>><br>
>> A>B>C<br>
>><br>
>> but C>A by a smaller defeat strength than A>B
or B>C. But D>A by an even smaller defeat strength,
however D<B and D>C?<br>
>><br>
>> i dunno how to dream up ballot combinations to do
that.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> > Without it all I can say that is that the River
winner may or may not be<br>
>> > a "better choice" than the<br>
>> > RP winner.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > River's main practical point is that it easier
than Schulze and RP to use.<br>
>><br>
>> i think it's more complicated than RP. it's RP with
an additional exception.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> i have to say i am still not convinced of WV.
probably Schulze-Margins is still the best, but RP-Margins
good enough and possibly easier to sell to policy makers and
the public.<br>
>><br>
>> i like Margins in principle: The percentage Margin is
(WV-LV)/(WV+LV) and is a measure of the decisiveness of
defeat, without respect to the size of the election. So 5%
defeat is a more decisive defeat than a 4% defeat.<br>
>><br>
>> But if you consider every Condorcet pair as it's own
little election, then the salience of the election would be
the number of voters that weigh in on it, which is WV+LV.<br>
>><br>
>> So if the net defeat strength (the index to rank the
pairs) is the product of how important the election is with
the decisiveness of defeat you get:<br>
>><br>
>> (WV+LV) x (WV-LV)/(WV+LV) = WV - LV<br>
>><br>
>> it just seems to me that Margins is better than WV.<br>
>><br>
>> but say, WV, is a good idea for defeat strength. is
LV a better idea?<br>
>><br>
>> hmmmm.<br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>><br>
>> r b-j <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br>
>><br>
>> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ----<br>
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://electorama.com/em" moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a>
for list info<br>
></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>
--<br>
<br>
r b-j <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br>
<br>
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."<br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://electorama.com/em" moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>