At 08:38 AM 1/22/2007, Michael Ossipoff wrote: >Yes, it was years ago when Approval won here. But it's all we have to go on. >How would we vote on how to vote, if we don't use the most recent method >that won? The only other alternative, which I have nothing against, would be >to use "Voter's Choice", a method that I've proposed, and which we used when >we chose Approval. Voter's Choice is for voting when there's no pre-existing >voting system chosen.
Range Voting can be analyzed to convert the ballot into most any election method, I can't think of one that is seriously proposed which can't use a Range Ballot with sufficient resolution. Indeed, Range is generally of higher resolution than that, but not necessarily, for Approval is a Range method. If Approval is the favorite method, and if there is no significant cost to using higher-resolution Range, then, quite clearly, Range is better for us to use, because it allows analysis of the results in more detail. With sufficient deliberation, it may be moot. And voters are totally free to say "This is too complicated to figure out" -- I.e., "I don't want to take the time to rate methods in more detail than Good or Bad -- by voting the extremes in Range. Converting Range to Approval, though, requires the specification of an Approval cutoff. Various cutoffs have been proposed. 50% is the obvious simplest one. This gets a lot clearer if the Range is expressed as -N to +N. 50% is zero, i.e., is easily interpreted as neutral. Our votes here are only advisory. The advice will be more useful if the collection of opinion that it is based upon are expressed in more detail. There is no risk of strategic voting in Range causing some harm, because if ballot analysis shows the possibility of strategic voting, the analyst can compensate for that. This is all FA/DP stuff, actually. FAs don't move power, they merely advise. And those using the advice can analyze polls whatever way they like. They could use the date of joining the organization to discriminate between newcomers and seasoned veterans. They could use caucus membership to consider affiliational bias. And if it is a Range Poll, they can consider preference strength if they want to and not if they don't. (And in DP organizations, of course, they can analyze the poll results using a proxy list to give greater weight to those who are more massively trusted.) ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
