Kevin Venzke wrote: > > > If you're voting strategy is based on who you think is or is not likely > > to win, that suggests an IR-type approach, such as Brian Olson's > > "Instant Runoff Normalized Ratings" (IRNR), > > http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-May/012885.html > > Hmm, Plurality, cumulative voting, IRV, Approval, and CR all suggest this > sort of strategy.
IRNR seems equivalent to repeated runoff elections. In a zero-info election with five candidates, where my preferences are A>B>C>D>E, I would vote something like: A(1.0) > B(0.001) > C(0.000001) > D(0.000000001) > E(0.0) The idea is that subsequent ratings are low enough that they don't detract much from my first-choice vote in each round. And if my first choice is ever eliminated, the bulk of my voting power always goes to my highest remaining choice. If not zero info, I would still vote as above except that the order of candidates would be the same as my strategic ranking under regular IRV (lesser-evil front runners, followed by non-competitive favorites, followed by greater-evil front-runners and crank candidates). In other words, just as straight cumulative voting is strategically equivalent to plurality, cumulative voting with elimination seems strategically equivalent to IRV or repeated runoffs. Bart ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
