On Nov 13, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Bob Richard wrote:
On 11/13/2010 8:09 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Sand W wrote:
Here are the results on an actual election: http://www.demochoice.org/dcresults.php?poll=OakMayor&type=table
<http://www.demochoice.org/dcresults.php?poll=OakMayor&type=table>
Perata (or maybe someone in his camp) accuses the other candidates
of "gaming the system" by promoting each other as 2nd choices.
Some challengers tried to do that to IRV-leader Kriss Worthington
too, but he won by a landslide.
Unfortunately, there isn't enough data here to check who would won
under other methods, except for Plurality (where Don Perata would
have won). To find out the social order for a Condorcet method, one
would need the Condorcet matrix, and for most other methods, the
raw ballot data itself.
Raw ballot data is here:
http://www.acgov.org/rov/rcv/results/OaklandMayor/ballot_image.txt
http://www.acgov.org/rov/rcv/results/OaklandMayor/
master_lookup.txt
http://www.acgov.org/rov/rcv/results/ballot_image_help.pdf
Here is the Condorcet matrix from these data files (entries are the
number preferring the row candidate over the column candidate). If
your email program doesn't handle HTML tables very well, this might
be scrambled.
what a minute Bob, just comparing the Perata/Quan race, it appears
that your totals are off by about 10000, when you compare to that
DemoChoice results at http://www.demochoice.org/dcresults.php?poll=OakMayor&type=table
. the IRV final round should be precisely the pair of numbers you
get in the Condorcet matrix (why the hell did that format get used?,
it should be a triangle so that the relevant numbers sit side-by-side).
you have
Quan 53778
Perata 51720
whereas the IRV round-by-round results are
Quan 43825
Perata 41949
so what gives? that's a pretty big discrepancy.
--
r b-j [email protected]
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
