2011-09-05T18:31:16Z, “Jameson Quinn” <[email protected]>:
> SODA was initially designed as a single-winner system.
Sorry but it looks like a terrible degraded form of Asset-Voting.
> I believe that as such, it has four independent advantages, three of
> which are unmatched by any other good system.
[snip/]
I just do not see any of those advantages. As far as simplicity, one
cannot beat approval:
Approve:
+1
Neutral or no opnion:
0
Reject:
-1
+1 0 -1 Name
[ ] [ ] [ ] Alpha
[ ] [ ] [ ] Bravo
[ ] [ ] [ ] Charlie
[ ] [ ] [ ] Delta
[ ] [ ] [ ] Echo
[ ] [ ] [ ] Foxtrot
[ ] [ ] [ ] Golf
[ ] [ ] [ ] Hotel
[ ] [ ] [ ] India
[ ] [ ] [ ] Juliet
[ ] [ ] [ ] Kilo
[ ] [ ] [ ] Mike
[ ] [ ] [ ] November
[ ] [ ] [ ] Oscar
[ ] [ ] [ ] Papa
[ ] [ ] [ ] Quebec
[ ] [ ] [ ] Romeo
[ ] [ ] [ ] Sierra
[ ] [ ] [ ] Tango
[ ] [ ] [ ] Uniform
[ ] [ ] [ ] Victor
[ ] [ ] [ ] Whiskey
[ ] [ ] [ ] X-Ray
[ ] [ ] [ ] Yankee
[ ] [ ] [ ] Zulu
Since I cannot find anything nice to say about SODA, after this reply
and 1 to “Toby Pereira” <[email protected]>, I shall drop the subject.
> JQ
“⸘Ŭalabio‽”
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
