On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Forest Simmons wrote: > Suppose that somebody comes up with a great method that requires complete > rankings, perhaps a de-cloned version of the Kemeny Order. > > Here's a suggestion for a convention on filling in the truncated ballots: > > Automatically rank the truncated candidates according to the candidate > card published by the highest ranked candidate on the ballot. > > So if a ballot comes in as A>B>C=D, and candidate A's published preference > order is A>D>C>B, then the ballot is completed as A>B>D>C. > > A more complicated example: > > Let's say a ballot comes in as A=B>C=D, and the published preferences of > candidates A and B are A>B>C>D and B>A>C>D, respectively. > > Then it is clear that C=D should be replaced with C>D, but how about the > A=B? > > We consult C's published preference order C>B>A>D, to break the tie. > > The result is B>A>C>D. >
If we could come up with a satisfactory convention on filling in indifferent ballot preferences, then the margins/winning votes controversy would become moot. Forest ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
