It occurred to me that the reason we are failing the Participation Criteria with Bucklin in the below example:
49: X:1st Y:4th 50: X:5th Y:4th Y wins. Now we add two votes: 2: X:3rd Y:2nd X wins. is because we are letting people skip grades/places. Or to put another way, if we asked the voters under Bucklin to fill out each ballot more strictly, ranking 1st through Nth where there are N candidates - I know that several do not like this approach, *but* my question is this - does *strictly ranked* Bucklin fail Participation?? 49: X:1st Y:2nd 50: X:2nd Y:1st Y wins on 1st round. Now we add two votes: 2: X:2nd Y:1st Y still wins on first round. In other words, I *think* what's bringing in the issues with Participation is the gaps in the ranking the first approach permits. Is it? If so, it may be that Bucklin can be quite Participation compliant, so long as you take certain steps like mandating a ranked order among your choices on the ballot. -Benn Grant eFix Computer Consulting <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] 603.283.6601
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
