Previously we had: ** 49: X:1st Y:4th****
50: X:5th Y:4th**** Y wins.**** ** ** Now we add two votes:**** 2: X:3rd Y:2nd**** X wins. So to make a ranked example: 49: XpqYrstuabcdef 49: XutYsrpqfedcba 50: abcYXdefpqrstu 50: fedYXcbautsrpq Add 4 votes: 4: aXYbcdefpqrstu Now I added 12 candidates there, but I'm sure with a little work I could get it down to somewhere in the range of just 4-8 extra candidates. But the point is made. Jameson 2013/6/17 Benjamin Grant <[email protected]> > ** ** > > *From:* Jameson Quinn [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, June 17, 2013 12:15 PM > *Subject:* Re: Participation Criteria and Bucklin - perhaps they *can* > work together after all?**** > > ** ** > > 2013/6/17 Benjamin Grant <[email protected]>**** > > 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**** > > ** ** > > Oh. That’s disappointing. I have to see it with my own eyes, although I > am sure you know what you are talking about, my brain won’t let me move on > until I see the disproof. So I will try to create one – a situation where > in using strictly ranked Bucklin, adding a new ballot in which A is ranked > higher than B, this new ballot somehow switches the winner from A to B.*** > * > > ** ** > > The challenge is that its intuitively seems like such an impossible task, > I am worried that should such an example be possible (and you say it is, > and I believe you) I might never find it in my blind spot!**** > > ** ** > > So if anyone **has** a handy example of this, I would be grateful for it > being brought to my attention, otherwise, I am going to have to try to > create it on my own in my own blind spot.**** > > ** ** > > Thanks. J**** > > ** ** > > -Benn Grant**** > > eFix Computer Consulting**** > > [email protected]**** > > 603.283.6601**** > > ** ** >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
