On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:24 AM, Kathy Dopp wrote: > > As Jonathan Lundell noted, "burial is a simple, intuitive and > attractive strategy that can be easily employed by relatively naive > voters", and it therefore ought to be allowed so that voters can try > to bury their least favorite mainstream candidate. > > Burial ability is a good feature of voting systems, easily understood > by most voters, not a feature to be avoided. > > I'm glad we seem to agree that later-no-harm is not a good feature of > a voting system because it prevents compromise.
Hmm. I think you missed my next sentence. > Burial works against compromise by encouraging voters to rank the potential > compromise candidate last. ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
