2013/6/17 Benjamin Grant <[email protected]> > 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?? >
Yes. Just add 500 other candidates, and fill in the gaps with randomly-selected candidates from the 500. Obviously, you could probably get by with a lot less than 500 — at a rough guess, I'd expect that 8 would be plenty without changing the numbers here, and probably around 4-6 would be enough to make a similar example with smaller gaps work, but my point is that with enough extra candidates who cluster at the bottom of most ballots, you can turn any rated scenario into a ranked scenario. You are being tempted by a mirage here. The first lesson of "voting school kindergarten" is that most problems don't have a perfect solution. That doesn't mean you stop looking for ways to improve things, but it does mean that when you imagine a "fix", you do your best to shoot holes in your own idea. 95% of the time you'll succeed, but the other 5% still makes it worth it. Jameson
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
