<html><head><style id="css_styles" type="text/css"><!--blockquote.cite { margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right:0px; border-left: 1px solid #cccccc }
blockquote.cite2 {margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right:0px; border-left: 1px solid #cccccc; margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 0px; }
a img { border: 0px; }
li[style='text-align: center;'], li[style='text-align: center; '], li[style='text-align: right;'], li[style='text-align: right; '] { list-style-position: inside;}
body { font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 12pt; }
.quote { margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; border-left: 5px #ebebeb solid; padding-left: 0.3em; }
--></style></head><body><div>I disagree with Toby here, at least under some circumstances. But I'm speaking as a voter, not as a student of social choice theory. To me as a voter, there can be a huge difference between ranking a candidate last and leaving that candidate unranked. To put it simply, under some voting rules there will always be candidates that I am unwilling to vote for, even in last place.</div><div><br /></div><div>This depends on the voting rule. If the rule makes it impossible for my last place ranking to ever help the candidate(s) I oppose, and if I can rank multiple candidates equal bottom, then I am willing to assign a rank to every candidate when truncation is not allowed. But if the rule leaves open the possibility that my last place ranking will end up helping a candidate I oppose get elected, then I would be obligated, as a matter of conscience, to abstain from voting at all. This can happen, for example, in IRV when truncation is not allowed.</div><div><span><br /></span></div><div><span>If I were Australian, I would end up paying the fine for not voting after every election.</span></div><div><span><br /></span></div><div><span>--Bob Richard</span></div>
<div style="clear:both"><br /></div>
<div>
<div>------ Original Message ------</div>
<div>From "Toby Pereira" <<a href="mailto:tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk">tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk</a>></div>
<div>To "Colin Champion" <<a href="mailto:colin.champion@routemaster.app">colin.champion@routemaster.app</a>>; "Forest Simmons" <<a href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com">forest.simmons21@gmail.com</a>></div>
<div>Cc "EM" <<a href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com">election-methods@lists.electorama.com</a>></div>
<div>Date 2/20/2023 3:14:01 AM</div>
<div>Subject Re: [EM] Hey guys, look at this...</div></div><div><br /></div>
<div id="xadbe9accd3de410"><blockquote cite="851557413.5925810.1676891641058@mail.yahoo.com" type="cite" class="cite2">
<div class="ydpd1b84f68yahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><div></div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">One thing I'm uncomfortable with is the notion of "unranked" candidates. If there are 4 candidates - A, B, C and D - and one ballot has A>B>C>D and another just A>B>C, they should be treated as the same. Unranked is just (possibly joint) last and I don't see it as having special status.</div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br /></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Toby</div><div><br /></div>
</div><div id="ydp678f550ayahoo_quoted_7091018887" class="ydp678f550ayahoo_quoted">
<div style="font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
<div><br /></div>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div>
</body></html>