[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>>Check also James Green-Armytage's cardinal-weighted pairwise comparison method if you haven't don that yet. => http://fc.antioch.edu/~james_green-armytage/cwp13.htm
Thanks, I'll do that!
>>I find the proposed method interesting since it seems to aim at electing good winners (using a function minimizes the problems caused to the voters, from one point of view).
I'd be happy to try. Do you have an example election for me to play with? I'm assuming you mean where I said
3. If there is no Condorcet winner, find the shortest distance (sum of individual ranges) necessary to produce a Condorcet winner.
An example in the form of
A: X>Y>Z (Value for X=100, Z=0, Y=somewhere in between)
B: Y>Z>X (Value for Y=100, X=0, Z=somewhere in between)
C: Z>X>Y (Value for Z=100, Y=0, X=somewhere in between)
would be great. If it's more than three candidates or ballot profiles, just make the range from 0 to 100 (0-10, A-F, or whatever you want). An example also helps make certain I'm answering the right question. (heh)
Thanks!
Michael Rouse
BTW, if anyone thinks of a more interesting variation -- or better yet, a webpage for one -- I'd love to see it, especially since there are several on the mailing list that are much better at the math than I! (grin)
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
