2012/9/6 Michael Ossipoff <[email protected]> > Jameson: > > I'd said: > > >> With Score, you add each ballot's rating of X to X's total. > >> > >> With MJ, if one or two newly-counted ballots rate X above hir current > >> median, then you must raise X's MJ score to hir rating on the ballot > >> with the lowest X-rating above X's median (or maybe to the mean of two > >> such ballots?). > >> > >> That means you have to go through the ballots again, to find the one > >> with the lowest X-rating above X's median. ...unless you've sorted > >> all of the ballots, by their ratings, for each candidate. > >> > >> You don't think that's a lot more computation-intensive than Score? (see > >> above). > >> > > Yes, but that's totally the wrong way to do it. You don't keep a running > > track of the median as you count, you simply tally each rating for each > > candidate. > > But that sounds more like the definition of Score. Tallying, for each > candidate, each ballot's rating of that candidate. >
That's not tallying. Tallying means making a count. Three apples, not three pounds of apple. 1,2,3; not 3,5,8. In this case the tally would look like this: Gandalf: A: IIII 4 B: II 2 C: 0 D: 0 F: IIII 3 Saruman: A: IIII 4 B: 0 C: III 3 D: III 3 F: 0 Gandalf's median is B (CMJ of 3.0); Saruman's is C (CMJ of 2.167). Is that clear now? > > That will give the candidates' totals in Score, but it won't find the > medians of their ratings, as needed for MJ. > > I didn't say that it would be necessary to keep running track of the > medians as you process each ballot I said that, if you prefer, you > could also, in advance, for each candidate, sort the ballots by their > ratings. > > > (Note that part of the definition of MJ is that you use a limited > > number of non-numeric ratings, so it's more like A-F than 100-0; a > > manageable number of tallies.) > > That doesn't speak to the question of whether MJ is as easily-counted > as Score. It's just a statement of the well-established fact that > fewer available ratings means easier count. > > So then, are you saying that MJ's increased count-work can be > alleviated by reducng the number of ratings available to > voters--limiting voters to 6 rating-levels to alleviate MJ's greater > need for count-work? > > > Once you have the tallies > > Tallies of what? Gotten how? If you're referring to a specific count > procedure, specify it. > > > , computing the > > median (and the MJ or CMJ tiebreakers) is easy. And tallying is easier, > less > > error-prone, and more informative, than a running total as in Score. > > Mike Ossipoff >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
