Really a trivial question, and brings us back to looking closer at
Condorcet.
IRV also does ranking, but has a different order of looking at ballots:
Vote for minor candidate? Likely discarded when seen, thus of
little effect.
Vote for third party before major? May prevent major being
seen when most effective.
Vote for major before third party? This could be the day this
third party needs seeing quicker to win.
Ranking methods only require deciding which candidate is better, while
range also asks how much and for voter to be understood when
expressing that "much".
Dave Ketchum
On Nov 13, 2011, at 8:46 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
Ted Stern wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/science/voters-experience-stress-on-election-day-study-finds.html
I remember hearing about other studies showing that making difficult
decisions "uses up" the energy and neurotransmitters required for
will
power.
So to bring this back on topic, I think we should be looking for
methods that make voting decisions easier for the voter, because it
will lead to better, less stressful decisions.
The question then is "what is easier?". Myself, I find ranking easier
than rating because I don't have to care about anchoring the ratings
properly (i.e. what does a 10 *mean* in comparison to a 0? Does Stalin
get a 0? Does Satan get a 0, and if both are on the ballot, does
Stalin
still get a 0, or does he get a 1 for being better than Satan?).
However, I've heard that others think that rating is easier and more
intuitive than ranking.
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
