Russ,
--- Russ Paielli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit�:
Forest had said:
> > Like I say, Demorep and others came up with many variations on this,
> > including using truncation for the approval cutoff. But note advocating
> > this truncation approach for an approval cutoff is tantamount to
> > thumbing one's nose at the later-no-harm criterion that Kevin is trying
> > valiantly to rescue.
>
> I don't follow you here. I would require the voter to rank the approved
> candidates and simply not rank the unapproved candidates. That's simple
> and intuitive.
Well, if you want to know why I would criticize methods that consider ranked
methods to be approved, it's because this gives voters more incentive to
abbreviate their rankings. I think such incentive is very harmful to similar
candidates.
By the way, you don't have to weed out the non-Smith candidates. "While
there's no CW, eliminate the Approval loser" always picks a Smith candidate.
Kevin Venzke
D�couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails !
Cr�ez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
