After posting yesterday, I realized that the credentials are relevant to the
declaration-signing, rather than to the answers for
Democracy Chronicles.
It [the declaration] recommends 4 methods. If for some reason you don't want to
just read it,
[endquote]
I have no objection to reading it. In fact, I've been meaning to read it again.
Thanks for the additional link, above.
You continued:
here's my summary:
Approval
Range or Score Voting
Majority Judgement (median point totals)
You missed Condorcet (does not specify which form)
[endquote]
Yes, I did, but I included Condorcet in my 2nd answers posting, the one for
which I used the correct
subject-line.
You added:
It also mentions 2 others:
SODA (simple optionally delegated Approval)
In the declaration, SODA is mentioned as "too soon to recommend but merits
further study".
The
declaration mentions both advantages and disadvantages of IRV, and says
that there are both signers who support and those who oppose the
system.
[endquote]
Right, I remember that IRV was mentioned with a lower status than the others. I
didn't remember that
SODA wasn't recommended along with Approval, Range, and Median Totals
(Majority-Judgement).
I like it that the recommendations for public elections don't include the
flagrantly FBC-failing IRV.
As for SODA, I can understand their hesitation to recommend something new, and
also very different, though I'm sure that
SODA would be a fine enhancement option for Approval.
I'm entirely pleased with the declaration's recommendations.
Mike Ossipoff
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
