> With wv as presented in this mail group, the voted > disliked candidates are ranked ahead of "unknown" > (nonvoted) candidates. Thus the risk that a......
Yes, I can see that. But I didn't mean my concern in the context of the wv/margins dispute. I think people *would* rank unknown candidates, thinking of it as a kind of strategy. The candidates may not literally be "unknown," but there could be rather little known about even second tier candidates. As an example, perhaps Pat Buchanan could accidentally win. Most people know something about him, but I bet quite a few Gore supporters would rank Buchanan above Bush, thinking it a possible weapon against Bush, without any risk of electing the former. > Approval completed Condorcet chooses the Condorcet > winner if there is one and when there is no > Condorcet winner it chooses the approval winner. This requires a simultaneous approval and ranked ballot, right? Wouldn't it be a better system at least to find the Condorcet winner among candidates meeting a defined Approval threshold? My motivation for mixing Condorcet and Approval would be to protect against the former's possible flukes. Stepjak ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran�ais ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
