On Aug 27, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
This thread has touched several points.
Branding
I'm not particularly fond of "TRC" as a name for Condorcet. Ideally,
a name should give some idea of how the system actually works. That
was where my "VOTE" branding idea came from (Virtual One-on-one
Tournament Election). Other ideas along those lines:
I just thought of an alternative, but leave this topic open: Full
Ranked Choice.
I am still open to thought on this, but the method leans toward
combining simple rules with power. Stepping up from starters:
Plurality - voter ranks ONLY ONE candidate.
Approval - voter ranks one or more, but all with same rank.
TRC/FRC - voter ranks one or more, with same or different ranks.
Each voter is permitted at least one write-in. Each
candidate voted by write-in has same right to win as if nominated.
Can one candidate be voted for partly as nominated and partly via
write-in? I lean toward no, but am not decider on this.
Each pair of candidates is in a race and leader awarded one
point for ranking if one ranked, or for being ranked higher if both
ranked by a voter.
Often one will be ranked the higher of the pair in all of
that candidate's races.
If no such, likely there will be a cycle such as A>B>C>A.
The method used must provide for a winner for this, but TRC/FRC does
not yet specify what to do.
Other than such wins or cycles - not considered yet.
IRV - rejectable for minor restrictions on ballot, and major
difficulties caused by not reading all that the voter votes.
Other ranked choice such as Borda or Bucklin, I claim the above
win for simplicity and ability, lack of restrictions on ranking when a
ranking is permitted, count of a ranking varies here for context, etc.
Other, such as score.
PR - worth considering for legislatures, etc. I am arguing for
such as mayor.
...
Criteria
Bayesian regret is absolutely a fundamentally-important criterion
for evaluating voting systems. However, it is not the only
criterion. Neither is it entirely objective, since any actual
Bayesian regret measure depends on a true-preference model and a
strategy model, both of which are inevitably debatable. I don't
think it's helpful to try to use some specific set of Bayesian
regret measures as a be-all-and-end-all argument. They may be
decisive for you, and it's helpful if you say so; but they won't,
nor should they, stop other people from taking other positions.
"Let's just pick one system we can all support"
We are not ready - but should be discarding the rottenest lemons.
JQ
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
