Abd ul-Rahman Lomax writes: > At 05:56 PM 3/13/2007, Kevin Venzke wrote: >> > The problem is that we have this idea of >> > exaggeration. But why would one exaggerate? >> > *Because they care.* In other words, it is not an exaggeration. >> >>You can similarly say that if I rob a bank at gunpoint, I must have >>genuinely needed the money. > > This conversation is bankrupt. > > Yes, if I rob a bank, at gunpoint or otherwise, I obviously have > sufficient motivation to take the very substantial risks involved. > What's the point?
Take a voter who thinks candidate A is the best, B is bad, and C is the worst. His best estimates of normalized utility might be A=1, B=0.2, C=0. If the ballot asks for scores based on how much a voter likes the candidates, then a vote with B=0 is insincere: the voter is not answering what the ballot asks for. However, if the ballot asks for something else, it could be a sincere vote. What instructions do you think a range voting ballot should give voters? Michael Poole ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
