Warren Smith wrote: > strong candidates that you actually approve of but are not your first > choice" > > --this "strategic" move actually is "strategicaly stupid" i.e.non-optimum, > generally speaking. See http://rangevoting.org/RVstrat3.html > and compare columns B and E for large # of voters. > > The writer here is advising somebody to be UNstrategic, then complaining that > what > happens if they obey his advice, is the horrible consequence of strategic > voting! > > Warren D Smith > http://rangevoting.org > The strategy proposed is essentially truncation. To be convinced that it doesn't work, I'd want to see a simulation with a more realistic model of voter behavior. The reported simulation has voters choosing their preferences uniformly at random.
-- Andrew ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
