<div dir="ltr"><div>Valuation can be ordinal, in that you can know that 3 is more than 2.</div><div>There are two questions before us: Which voting method collects more data? Which tabulation method picks the best winner from that data?</div><div><br></div><div>Which voting method collects more data?</div><div>Cardinal voting collects higher resolution data than ordinal voting. Consider this thought experiment. If I give you a rating of A:5 B:2 C:1 D:3 E:5 F:2 you should create an ordered list from that -- AEDFBC. If I gave you AEDFBC you couldn't convert that back into its cardinal data.</div><div><br></div><div>Which tabulation picks a better winner from the data?</div><div>Both Score and Approval voting pick the person with the highest votes.</div><div>Summing ordinal data, on the other hand, is very complicated, as to avoid loops. Methods like Condorcet or IRV have been proposed to eliminate those but ultimately they're hacks for dealing with incomplete information.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><a href="https://felixsargent.com" target="_blank">Felix Sargent</a><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:23 AM John <<a href="mailto:john.r.moser@gmail.com">john.r.moser@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><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="gmail-m_-253417112080945646money">$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="gmail-m_-253417112080945646money">$600</span> of my dollars is fewer hours than <span class="gmail-m_-253417112080945646money">$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" target="_blank">cbenham@adam.com.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div 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/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://rangevoting.org/</a><br>
<br>
</p><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 none;color:rgb(0,0,0);text-decoration:none;background:rgb(209,154,59) none repeat scroll 0% 0%" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">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 none;color:rgb(95,14,0);text-decoration:none" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">0 to 99</a>) for each
candidate. Simpler is 0 to 9 ("single digit score voting").</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p></p>
<div class="gmail-m_-253417112080945646m_-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="gmail-m_-253417112080945646m_-816986146098263387DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid rgb(211,212,222)">
<tbody><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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"><img src="https://static2.avg.com/2000491/web/i/ipm/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png" alt="" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" width="46" height="29"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:rgb(65,66,78);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:rgb(68,83,234)" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="#m_-253417112080945646_m_-816986146098263387_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1" rel="noreferrer"> </a></div></div>
</blockquote></div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div>