<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>TO: Forest <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>FROM: Steve (stevebosworth@hotmail.com)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Below, Forest offers what seems to me to be a strange and unintelligible suggestion which is supposed to relate to my current support of MJ. Is this suggestion just a playful in joke that I do not understand, or please explain its serious relevance to
debates about the virtues of MJ?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Message: 3<br>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div class="PlainText">Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2021 20:11:46 -0700<br>
From: Forest Simmons <)><br>
To: EM <Election-methods@lists.electorama.com><br>
Subject: [EM] For Better or for Worse ... an MJ variant<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CANUDvfqsHjqaON=tvQmwNunRa+QVPD+8MWjQ=ycXHbyo8gSSZA@mail.gmail.com><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Steve Bosworth's steadfast advocacy for MJ has made me wonder if there<br>
might be a version of MJ that satisfies the Reverse Symmetry Criterion, and<br>
perhaps Participation, as well.<br>
<br>
Here's my idea ...<br>
<br>
Each voter judges each candidate with an appropriate specialized vocabulary<br>
word by writing the word next to the candidate's name on the ballot.<br>
<br>
The words must be spelled using only letters from the set {B, W}.<br>
<br>
They can be short or long, but they have to fit (left justified) into the<br>
spaces provided next to the candidate names. Fortunately, B and W are easy<br>
for optical scanner/digitzers to distinguish.<br>
<br>
For example, if a voter writes the word<br>
<br>
BBWBWWB<br>
<br>
next to the name Jos? Jim?nez, she is describing Jos? as being among the<br>
better possible candidates... in fact among the better of the better, yet<br>
among the worse of the better of the better, etc. Each letter refines the<br>
partial judgment represented by the preceding letters ... so it's more like<br>
Romance languages where the modifiers conform to post-fix rather than<br>
pre-fix conventions ... Casa Blanca vs White House.<br>
<br>
If you are thinking that we are going to convert each word into a binary<br>
point number ... well, no ...we're going to do something much more subtle<br>
and interesting for which the arithmetic operations on binary numbers are<br>
not well adapted (though alpha numeric string operations could work, but<br>
let's stick with literature!):<br>
<br>
For convenience list all of the ballot words judging Jos? in alphabetical<br>
(lexicographical) order...<br>
<br>
BBBBB<br>
BBBBB<br>
BBBBW<br>
...<br>
WWBBW<br>
WWWBB<br>
...<br>
WWWWW<br>
<br>
Suppose that most of these judgment words start with B..Then the first<br>
letter of the majority judgment (of Jos?) will be a B.<br>
<br>
Before continuing we have to modify the losing words ... the ones that<br>
started with W ... cross out the initial W, but replace the remaining<br>
letters (if there are any) with W's to reflect these voters' opinion that<br>
the majority judgment (B) was too nice, so on the question of remaining<br>
letters, all of these voters' words will come down on the side of W.<br>
<br>
After these modifications, determine by majority rule the next letter in<br>
Jose's judgment, and make the usual adjustments to the losing words.<br>
<br>
What if there is a tie, meaning both letters get equal support. Then put a<br>
neutral letter n for "neither better nor worse" in that position of Jose's<br>
majority judgment word, and base its next letter on whether there are more<br>
W's or B's in the next position of the remaining words in the list (of<br>
voter words judging Jose). Continue as necessary until the tie is fully<br>
resolved.<br>
<br>
So we see that the majority judgment words for the various candidates will<br>
be formed with letters from the set<br>
<br>
{B, n, W}<br>
<br>
The order of finish is the dictionary order of the respective majority<br>
judgment words ... assuming a really up to date comprehensive English<br>
dictionary .<br>
<br>
Have I overlooked anything? Is Mono-Add satisfied? Reverse Symmetry?<br>
<br>
Do the rules make sense heuristically?<br>
<br>
FWS<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20211016/7e1ddfa6/attachment-0001.html">http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20211016/7e1ddfa6/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Election-Methods mailing list<br>
Election-Methods@lists.electorama.com<br>
<a href="http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com">http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Election-Methods Digest, Vol 207, Issue 29<br>
*************************************************<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>