On 04/13/2012 09:11 PM, ⸘Ŭalabio‽ wrote:
¡Hello!
¿How fare you?
I have had interactions with people on this list hating rated
ballots. I have a question for them:
If the ballot would allow both ratings and rankings, ¿would that be
acceptable?
The ballot could allow ranking or ratings with equal rankings or
ratings allowed. The rankings would then be converted to ratings
like thus:
[snip]
¿Would this be acceptable?
No, I don't think so. That is essentially a weighted positional system,
and those are not very good at all. Every weighted positional system
except Plurality fails the Majority criterion (unless you count DAC and
DSC as weighted positional systems). No weighted positional system can
satisfy the Condorcet criterion. Nor can they satisfy mutual majority
(again, unless DAC and DSC count).
As soon as you make it a ranked method, the ranked method has to prove
its worth in comparison to other ranked methods. Weighted positional
systems are not very good at doing that as a class -- unless you
absolutely have to have certain criteria (like FBC for Antiplurality).
More fundamentally, as Robert points out, people who dislike rating
don't just dislike rating because they have some grudge against numbers.
Robert dislikes rating - or rather, Score/Range - because it forces him
to be strategic and because it's not clear how much he should rate
someone even if he had been honest.
If you convert rankings to ratings like you suggest, then anybody who
ranks gets that choice made for them. The ratings are preset; but the
prospective voter *knows* that he could pick more freely if he rated
instead of ranked. So the choice is no choice at all.
If you're going to reduce, reduce rating to ranking instead. Use
cardinal weighted pairwise or approval weighted pairwise.
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
