<div dir="auto">Voters can't readily provide meaningful information as score voting. It's highly-strategic and the comparison of cardinal values is not natural.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">All valuation is ordinal. Prices are based from cost; but what people WILL pay, given no option to pay less, is based on ordinal comparison.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Is X worth 2 Y?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For the <span class="money">$1,000</span> iPhone I could have a OnePlus 6t and a Chromebook. The 6t...I can get a cheaper smartphone, but I prefer the 6t to that phone plus whatever else I buy.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I have a higher paying job, so each dollar is worth fewer hours, so the ordinal value of a dollar to me is lower. <span class="money">$600</span> of my dollars is fewer hours than <span class="money">$600</span> minimum wage dollars. I have access to my most-preferred purchases and can buy way down into my less-preferred purchases.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Information about this is difficult to pin down by voter. Prices in the stock market set by a constant, public auction among millions of buyers and sellers. A single buyer can hardly price one stock against another, and prices against what they think their gains will be relative to current price.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">When pricing candidates, you'll see a lot like Mohs hardness: 2 is 200, 3 is 500, 4 is 1,500; but we label things that are 250 or 450 as 2.5, likewise between 500 and 1,500 is 3.5. Being between X and Y is always immediately HALFWAY between X and Y, most intuitively.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The rated system sucks even before you factor in strategic concerns (which only matter if actually using a score-driven method).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Approval is just low-resolution (1 bit) score voting.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 21, 2019, 12:01 AM C.Benham <<a href="mailto:cbenham@adam.com.au">cbenham@adam.com.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Forest,<br>
<br>
With paper and pencil ballots and the voters only writing in their
numerical scores it probably isn't very practical for the
Australian Electoral Commission<br>
hand vote-counters.<br>
<br>
But if it isn't compulsory to mark each candidate and the default
score is zero, I'm sure the voters could quickly adapt.<br>
<br>
In the US I gather that there is at least one reform proposal to
use these type of ballots. One of these, "Score Voting" aka "Range
Voting", <br>
proposes to just use Average Ratings with I gather the default
score being "no opinion" rather than zero and some tweak to
prevent an unknown<br>
candidate from winning.<br>
<br>
So it struck me that if we can collect such a large amount of
detailed information from the voters then we could do a lot more
with it, and if we<br>
want something that meets the Condorcet criterion this is my
suggestion.<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<a href="https://rangevoting.org/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://rangevoting.org/</a><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="color:rgb(27,27,27);font-family:arial,sans-serif,"arial narrow";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial"><u></u><big><b>How
score voting works:</b></big><u></u></p>
<ol style="color:rgb(27,27,27);font-family:arial,sans-serif,"arial narrow";font-size:medium;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial" type="a">
<li>Each<span> </span><a href="https://rangevoting.org/MeaningOfVote.html" title="What a 'vote' is" style="border:1px;color:rgb(0,0,0);text-decoration:none;background:rgb(209,154,59)" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">vote</a><span> </span>consists of a numerical score
within some range (say<span> </span><a href="https://rangevoting.org/Why99.html" title="Other
scores such as 0-10 also are possible and we do not insist
on 0-99. Link explains why 0-99 is a good choice and how
to use other scores." style="border:1px;color:rgb(95,14,0);text-decoration:none" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">0 to 99</a>) for each
candidate. Simpler is 0 to 9 ("single digit score voting").</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br>
</p>
<div class="m_-816986146098263387moz-cite-prefix">On 21/06/2019 5:33 am, Forest Simmons
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Chris, I like it especially the part about naive voters
voting sincerely being at no appreciable disadvantage while
resisting burial and complying with the CD criterion. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From your experience in Australia where full rankings are
required (as I understand it) what do you think about the
practicality of rating on a scale of zero to 99, as compared
with ranking a long list of candidates? Is it a big obstacle?<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div id="m_-816986146098263387DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
<tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=oa-4885-b" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://static2.avg.com/2000491/web/i/ipm/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width:46px;height:29px"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free. <a href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=oa-4885-b" style="color:#4453ea" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">www.avg.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<a href="#m_-816986146098263387_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1" rel="noreferrer"> </a></div></div>
</blockquote></div>