Re: [EM] Cardinal Rating Condorcet Loser Elimination

[Dgamble997]

Dave Ketchum wrote in part:

>In public elections we need to have the voters understanding the method
>well enough to vote intelligently, and to be able to accept declared
>winners as appropriate to the vote count totals (which I claim should be
>public knowledge shortly after the polls close). Note - there can be
>absentee ballots counted later, BUT, the possible quantity of these should
>be publishable election night and, at least for Condorcet, these counts
>tell whether the counts are close enough to ties for the absentees to
>affect results

True, this method is complex but that isn't necessarily a problem. People in New Zealand approved Meek STV in referenda and Meek STV is not the simplest method in the world.

>Utility, assumed - best forgotten about, for you cannot KNOW why Joe
>liked A better than B (the liking could have been part of deciding whether
>to rank A above or below B).

You don't have to know why Joe liked A better B just that he did.

>Utility, as a ballot item - best FOUGHT AGAINST, for you have to
>build this into the voting equipment, you have to explain to voters what
>it is all about, they have to translate their feelings into filling in the
>item, and then they will suspect they have been done in by not
>understanding this item as well as the politicians down the street.

Utility is a fairly simple idea -you like A but you like B more.

David Gamble