Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:30 AM 11/7/2006, Chris Benham wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
90: A9>B1 (sincere is A9>B1)
10: B99>A0 (sincere is B5>A3)
All the voters have a sincere low opinion of both candidates, but
90% think that A is 900%
better than B and yet B wins (with only 10% of the voters not being
"sincere and honest").
It is almost as if Chris said, there are 100 eligible voters. 90 of
them stay home. 10 vote and the candidate they favor is elected.
Chris has assumed that a sincere Range vote would be an absolute
number. Range votes are *relative* (just like other votes,
generally). There is no intrinsic meaning to 99 or 0, beyond saying
that 99 is "the best" and 0 is "the worst."
If voters do not choose a "best" and a "worst," i.e., vote 99 or 0
for at least one candidate each, they have cast a weak vote. Casting
a maximum vote of 9 out of a possible 99 is like casting one-tenth of a vote.
CB: I was directly responding to
However, what is being said is that if
people use Range sincerely and honestly, Range will maximize expected
value, summed over all the voters.
Perhaps you can clarify your meaning of the phrase "expected value"?
Voters are not required to
satisfy any definition of preference strength under Range. They may
express what we might call a weak preference as strong, and they may,
but are unlikely to do so, express a strong preference as weak (I see
no reason why they would do this)
Lying, in the meaning I was using would be to reverse the actual
preference. I.e., we are talking about strategic voting, *not* merely
voting Approval style. The voter prefers B to C, but prefers A to be
and fears that B will win unless the voter ranks B at minimum. The
lie is not that the voter ranks B at minimum, but that the voter then
ranks C higher than B even though the preference is the opposite.
So now a Range vote is strategic only if it reverses a sincere
preference? On 29/10/06 you wrote:
In 0-99 Range, with Gore vs Nader vs Bush, they
would probably be advised to vote Nader 99,
Gore 98, Bush 0. If they were going to vote strategically. Otherwise
they just vote sincerely and
let the chips fall where they may. But that strategic vote would still
express a preference for Nader,..
We can certainly be sure majoritarian methods will outperform Range
in the worst-case scenarios.
Provocative statement made with utterly no evidence presented.
That is because it is obvious to everyone on this list with a clue,
while Abd has shown himself to be immune
to even clear simple proofs.
Chris Benham
|
----
election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
