Stephane wrote: >Why just stop there? >3-level approval is composed of >preferred, acceptable, disapproved >This can easily be matched to a preferential truncated ballot: >P1 A2 (and D truncated to manifest my desapproval) > >What if there is more than 3 candidates and I would like >to express my full opinion: >So it generalizes to: >P1 Q2 A3 B4 (and D and E truncated to...) >I rank all of my approved candidates.
I don't follow you? What are Q and B? How do you use lower rankings to decide a winner? I can see 2 ways to use 4+ levels. The first is to do just like Bucklin, going to lower and lower levels until you get a majority, but allow people to put multiple candidates in each level. I don't know much about Bucklin, so I don't know what defects it has, but the greater freedom of putting multiple candidates in each level should remedy some problems. The second is to use CR for lower levels. For example, if we rated candidates on a 0-10 scale, first you look to see if anybody has a majority of 10's. Failing that you look and see who has the highest average rating. Or maybe you look for a majority of 9's and 10's, or where ever you want the "preferred" and "acceptable" cutoffs to be. (zero would of course be unacceptable). Alex ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
