On May 14, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Dave, by the way,
--- En date de : Ven 14.5.10, Dave Ketchum
<[email protected]> a écrit :
We can dream of value in details as we sit here and
debate. Real-life voters need a way to express their
most serious thoughts with reasonable effort:
To vote for more than Plurality's
one - which even Approval offers.
To vary their approval according
to their amount of liking - Condorcet and Score offer this.
To ask for only reasonable effort
from the voters - see Condorcet.
Score demands more. A voter
thinking of A>B>C>D has no trouble offering min and
max ratings to A and D. With Score the
voter is expected to diligently assign the available rating
space among A>B, B>C, and C>D.
I notice that all of your arguments have to do with the expressiveness
and simplicity of the ballot (except when you criticize IRV).
Some objections to Condorcet could be:
1. It is not expressive enough (compared to ratings)
Truly less expressive in some ways than ratings.
This is balanced by not demanding ratings details.
And more expressive by measuring differences between each pair
of candidates.
2. Offensive strategy potential (absent in IRV, ratings, Bucklin)
How is IRV different?
3. Lacking guarantees (e.g. FBC or LNHarm)
Isn't this standard among methods - each with different details?
4. Too complicated to explain, or propose (a conceptual hurdle with
Condorcet is that we leave the actual ballots for the pairwise matrix
right away, making it hard to understand how voting different ways
could change things)
Some Condorcet methods of handling cycles are truly complex - I
recommend choosing a method for which cycle explaining is doable.
Counting into the matrix should class as understandable.
5. Not thought to be politically acceptable (third place in FPs can
win)
You seem to be complaining about newness - a problem for any new
thought until/unless accepted.
So, I wouldn't guess it's about expressiveness for most people.
Kevin Venzke
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for
list info
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
