Blake: What if, in a Margins election, I offered you 100 dollars to vote several candidates in 1st place, even though you don't prefer them equally. 100 dollars isn't much, as bribes go, but it's a lot more than the tiny expectation improvement you gain from voting. So it's to your advantage to take the bribe. I've given you an incentive to insincerely rank one or more lower choices equal to your favorite. Now, are you worse off because of that incentive that I've given you? No. In this case you're better off, at least a little. You've gained by having that opportunity. Yes, I have given you a difficult decision, as far as principle is concerned. Yes, I've given you a strategic calculation to make. But no, I haven't made you worse off. And you can igonre the strategic calculation, and the bribe offer, and vote as if you hadn't heard it, and you're no worse off for that either. If Condorcet, in a 0-info election, sometimes gives you incentive to insincerely rank your 2nd choice equal to your 1st choice, then, it isn't at all clear how that makes you worse off either. *** Aside from all that, I mentioned in previous messages that Margins bribes you to decline to vote a preference 1.5 times as often as Condorcet does. *** Mike Ossipoff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
