It seems to me that Arrow must want a unique generic meaning that people can 
relate to independent of 
the voting system.  Perhaps he is right that ordinal information fits that 
criterion slightly better than 
cardinal information, but as Warren says, what really matters is the 
operational meaning.

But back to a possible generic meaning of a score or cardinal rating:  if you 
think that candidate X would 
vote like you on a random issue with probability p percent, then you could give 
candidate X a score that 
is p percent of the way between the lowest and highest possible range values.

Note that this meaning is commensurable across the electorate.

Furthermore, with regard to commensurability of range scores, think of the 
example that Warren gave in 
which the optimum strategy is sincere range strategy; in that example it makes 
no difference (except for 
ease of counting) whether or not each voter uses a different range; some could 
use zero to 100, some 
negative 64 to positive 64, etc.  A ballot will distinguish among the two 
finalist lotteries in the same way 
after any affine transformation of the scores.

A few years ago Jobst gave a rather definitive discussion of this issue.  His 
investigation led to the result 
that ideally the scores should allow infinitesimals of various orders along 
with the standard real values 
that we are used to.  Jobst is skeptical about generic objective meaning for 
"utilities," but in the context 
of voting, especially "lottery" methods, he can give you a precise objective 
meaning of the scores.

For example, if you have a choice between alternative X or a coin toss to 
decide between Y and Z, and 
you don't care one whit whether or not X is chosen or the the coin toss decides 
between Y and Z, then 
(for you)objectively X has a utility value half way between Y and Z. 

A sequence of questions of this nature can help you rationally assign scores to 
a set of alternatives.

I'll see if I can locate Jobst's results in the archives. 

----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to