Jameson:
I'd said:
> My current favorite is MDD, ER-Bucklin (whole) (where ER-Bucklin(whole)
> is defined
> as in the electowicki).
>
>
You replied:
This is very similar to Majority Judgment. The advantages of the latter are:
1. There's a book about it.
2. There's a wikipedia article about it.
3. Balinski and Laraki (the inventors) make a good argument that methods
like this should use words, not numbers, as rating categories, to encourage
a common understanding of meanings among voters; and that this will improve
results.
[endquote]
I'll check its wikipedia article and its electowiki article if there is one.
Majority Judgement--Isn't that the Score Voting method that elects the candidate
with the highest median score? It seems to me that that method shares much of
the
extreme-rating incentive of ordinary Score Voting (the one that just sums each
candidate's scores).
I'd said:
> It's the Cadillac of FBC methods.
>
> Is there an FBC-complying method meets UP and SDSC and that does better by
> other criteria?
>
> Is there an FBC-complying method that doesn't fail in the Approval
> bad-example?
>
>
You replied:
SODA voting. As I've said about 5 times already.
[endquote]
Yes, but, as I was saying, I've encountered resistance when bringing up methods
involving
proxies (delegates.
Of course it doesn't hurt to ask people, but I didn't have much success with
such methods in
the past.
Mike Ossipoff
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
