If there are N voters, then voting power under random voter is 1/N for each voter.
Decent methods yield power proportional to k/sqrt(N), the better the method, the larger the k. Forest Chris Benham wrote: > >Forest W Simmons wrote: > >>Chris B wrote... >> >> >>>Regarding "social utility", I'm of the school that says that to the >>>extent that it is a real and wonderful thing it will look after itself >>>if we do >>>our best to ensure that the election method is as fair and >>>strategy-resistant as possible. >>> >>> >> >>Random Ballot is already fair and as strategy-resistant as possible, so >>there is wiggle room here. >> > >"Random Ballot" is equivalent to having a random citizen appoint the >office-holder (i.e. "Random Dictator"). >That isn't an "election" (it's a lottery), so therefore Random Ballot >isn't an "election method". > >>How about maximizing voting power, i.e. the >>probability that your ballot will make a difference in your favor in a >>typical election? >> > >In a large election, I wouldn't think there would be much difference on >that score between RB and a normal >fair deterministic voting method. > >Chris Benham > > > > ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
