On Jun 29, 2008, at 3:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonathan suggested eliminating in a chain and Raphfrk suggested that
this could be automated for large
groups.
I like the chain idea from one point of view: (as Raphfrk commented)
the extremes would end up
eliminating each other.
Here's a variation that I like slightly better:
I do like it better in that candidates aren't eliminated at random.
But my preference for a chain might go up as the size of the group
goes down, because of random 'bias' (not quite the word I'm looking
for).
While there are two or more voters remaining ...
pick a voter at random from these remaining voters
and allow this voter to eliminate one of the other voters
until all of the remaining voters agree who the winner should be.
[In this version, the same voter could be chosen as the eliminator
more than once.]
It has the advantage (over the chain method) of a smaller percentage
of the decisions being made by
voters on the fringe, and (over my previous proposal) of keeping the
voters near the center to help form
the unanimous consensus.
This method could also be automated in various ways, including
Raphfrk's suggestion.
Forest
From: Jonathan Lundell
Subject: Re: [Election-Methods] Another Lottery Method for the Record
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Jun 28, 2008, at 3:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In small groups:
A voter is chosen at random.
This voter picks another voter to be eliminated, along with himself.
One of the remaining voters is chosen at random, etc.
If the number of voters is odd, the last voter left decides
the
election.
If the number of voters is even, a coin is flipped to
determine
which of the last two voters decides the
election.
Nice.
Alternatively, only the first voter is chosen at random, and the
elimination proceeds in a chain.
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
