Warren,
Incidentlally, since you claim because you cannot explain the precise meaning
of a range vote
of 64 versus 65, therefore range voting is somehow horribel and inexplicable...
and you like DMC... I ask "explain to me the precise meaning of
`I approve of Bush.'"
Pretty difficult, isn't it? And also probably strategy dependent - it depends
who
are Bush's opponents, in practice. All of this is quite analogous to range
vote
values. (Annoyance mission completed.)
wds
I dislike plain Approval because it more-or-less forces voters to
concern themselves with strategy and the winning probabilities of
the candidates. Using a concept of absolute inflexible "approval" in a
method like DOC I used to object to on the same grounds.
But now I see that it is mathematically convenient and seems to
resonate in the real world.
My attempt to "precisely" define "I approve of Bush":
" If the ballot constrains me to equally help a set of candidates
(which I nominate) to defeat any non-member candidates, I put Bush
in that set. I prefer Bush to any candidate that I don't approve."
Chris Benham
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
