Hi! I am sorry for igniting such a flamewar.
1. information content I propose that this topic should be discussed only after understanding Shannon's information theory. A good introductory material is on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy If we consider all variations of votes equally possible, we end up that for n candidates - approval voting have 2^n possibilities (hence log2(2^n)=n bits) - preferential voting have n! possibilities (hence log2(n!) bits) (not counting the cases wherre not all candidates are ranked) I have made a mistake stating that it is clear that prefeerential voting have more information. It is true only for n>=4. Fortunately I am too young, didn't vote in communist times, so I have only encountered situations where n>=4. So now I consider that while my statement wasn't correct mathematically, it is true in real life situations. Now you can discuss how information content is different in real life because all votes not being equally possible, but please do not challenge well established theoretical facts. 2. game theory The discussion about how Nash equilibrium is reached with different voting methods had been very enlightening to me. It shown how to tackle my country's current situation from a mathematical standpoint. Maybe assumption about full information, no cooperation or logical voters should be changed, and changes of opinion of voters between election should be accounted for to have a better model. But there is the brief explanation of how I could understand the situation: We have a voting system which is converging fast, and the convergence point (I do not use notion of Nash equilibrium here) is far from the least unacceptable situation considering voters' preferences. 3. cooperation Since I have asked, I have found the answer to my question: what is the distinctive feature of Schulze? (The page has been on rangevoting.org, but I cannot find it now.) Shulze prefers the candidate which beatpath is weak (as far I can remember Schulze's description). Which means something like it is the least unacceptable candidate. I have the feeling that this is connected with cooperativeness of the candidate. Formal description or refusal of this effect is welcome.
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
