On Mon, 1 Oct 2001 11:59:47 -0700 (PDT) Forest Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > All methods will have some results that are counter-intuitive, at > > least to some people. > > What are the counter-intuitive results of Approval?
The fact that it doesn't allow enough ballot expression to determine if one candidate has a majority of first preferences is generally considered a bad thing by people who are first introduced to the method. Some people can be convinced that this characteristic isn't undesirable, but that's what I mean by counter-intuitive. It takes some convincing. There are other issues. A question like "Who is your favourite candidate?" or "Do you prefer this candidate to this one?" are clearly answerable. But "Do you approve of this candidate?" has no obvious meaning without relating it in some way to alternatives. That seems odd. If you take the view that approval indicates that the candidate is of above average utility, then introducing a really bad candidate can change who a voter approves of. In fact, the best way to reduce the influence of a minority is to introduce a candidate that is really appalling to it. If they are sincere, this will force them to approve of more of the other candidates. That seems like an unfortunate result. --- Blake Cretney
