Does "graded ballots" mean applying something that smells like "Borda" or does it give more weight to some voters than others?
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ] On Behalf Of Adam Tarr > Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 2:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [EM] Does MAM use the Copeland method? > > Paul Kislanko wrote: > > >I merely observe from the original ballots that 5 of 9 > voters prefer C > >over A. So those are the ones who will be unhappy if A is elected. > > > >That majority will initiate a referndum that changes the > voting method > >because it selected the "wrong" candidate from the VOTERS > perspective. > > The fact that a majority can prefer a defeated candidate to > the winner is an unavoidable consequence of Condorcet's > paradox. It also happened when using plurality in 2000, as > you may recall. > > >You academics can say A is right, but if that is so, this just > >demonstrates that Plurality does as well as anything. > > The fact that no election method is perfect does not imply > that none are better than others. It's simply a question of > what you consider important. > > -Adam > > P.S. Steve, maybe it's just me but I can't link to your > webpage at the moment. I was hoping to re-read your Immunity > from Majority Complaints criterion. > > And for the record, Steve's MAM is probably my favorite > method, although any winning-votes Condorcet method based on > sequential dropping or beat paths or ranked pairs would be > just as good in the vast majority of large public elections. > The far more significant distinction (within that class of > methods) is what ballot you use. I'm personally partial to > ABCDF graded ballots, with "E" being the default grade for > unranked candidates. > > ---- > Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em > for list info > ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
