Toby Pereira wrote:
I'm not sure I exactly followed that. Jameson's option 2 is to look at the nominated slates and see which is best. You could also still use one of the other methods to find a possible winner and then compare it with the best nominated slate (if they are different). Is that anything like what you're saying?
Perhaps it's a mix of the two: the election commission uses the best known approximation algorithm, and then others can try to improve upon the result. If they don't, then there's already a reasonably good result; if they do, all the better.
If the algorithm that produces the better result is then disclosed, the election commission can later make use of it. That would be a convergence towards the best result by a competition among algorithms, rather than by a competition among results.
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
