I remain interested in comments about the package, other than about a=b.
I am adding "-wvx" to the subject to debate a=b - time enough to think about labels if my idea, once understood, survives debate. My thought is that a=b expresses interest in this pair, just as a<b or b>a do for wv, but ranks them equally and therefore should not affect margins (of which I only care about equality vs inequality, but not magnitude).
Has nothing to do with margins, for such counts do not change margins.
Only counting explicit a=b (as each incrementing vote count by .5 for each side of that pair) - not counting how many pairs can be made from rejects.
Can combine - can say a=b=c to declare more than 2 - here a & b, a & c, and b & c.
Ted talks of margins and relative margins being different - HOW? He offers a definition at 15:54. Perhaps relative margins would be useful in resolving cycles - I hope not.
I have talked of array; Ted talks of pairwise matrix - same thing. No, voter cannot see it, for it is the sum of all the voting in the district (state for governor). It is VALUABLE data for study provided by Condorcet, aside from determining winner.
Relevance? That is a proper topic once we sort out what the basic topic is.
Does counting a=b complicate the counting? Seems like not a lot - perhaps a third number for each pair of candidates, used only in resolving cycles.
Dave Ketchum
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:25:16 -0800 (thru 16:05) Ted Stern wrote:
On 23 Feb 2005 at 20:25 PST, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Dave,
--- Dave Ketchum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit :
Try: 5 a>b 2 b>a 6 a=b By not counting the = we have 5:2 With counting them we have 8:5
The > and < determined that a gets 3 more votes than b - to me, strength of a's win over b.
It's called "Margins" when defeat strength is measured as the vote difference. With WV, the defeat strength is the number of votes for the winning side; in this case, it would be 5 votes.
I have the = making a have a total of 8 votes, useful (I think) in deciding how to untangle cycles, should that be needed.
A potential problem is that it becomes unclear how many people actually voted a>b.
Kevin Venzke
[CC: Steve Eppley, Markus Schulze, Rob LeGrand, election-methods list]
Hi Dave,
As Kevin has pointed out, by counting a=b as a>b + b>a, winning votes (wv) acquires some characteristics of relative margins (rm). With your tabulation rule, the margin doesn't change, but the winning vote totals do.
IMO, 'a=b' indicates equal preference, equivalent to abstention from the
pairwise election. In other words, it's a vote to consider that particular
contest AFTER all other considerations. That should be true whether one ranks
defeats using wv or rm.
I have noticed this tabulation disagreement before, e.g. Rob LeGrand's voting calculator (http://cec.wustl.edu/~rhl1/rbvote/calc.html). I've looked around briefly for an authoritative differentiation between the two tabulation rules, but aside from discussion on this list I haven't found one, hence the CC's.
It would be nice to get this misunderstanding cleared up. Any method description or software that uses a non-standard interpretation of equal rank tabulation should clearly indicate that it is doing so. If it is confusing to e-m list readers, imagine how confusing it would be to voters!
Ted
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 607-687-5026 Do to no one what you would not want done to you. If you want peace, work for justice.
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
