I limit the collection of ranking info to up to 3 rankings per voter, which is useful for practical purposes, and then treat the up to 3 rankings per voter as approval votes to determine which three of the umpteen candidates proceed. I then process those three with the standard IRV to find the winner.
dlw dlw On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Benjamin Grant <[email protected]>wrote: > So if I understand you: > > You have a single election. You permit people to rank up to 3 candidates, > no more. You eliminate form consideration all but the top 3 people who > were ranked, regardless of what rank they got. Then, with only those three > left, you proceed to process them with standard IRV to find the winner. > > Is that a correct summation of you system, do I understand it right? > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:19 AM, David L Wetzell <[email protected]>wrote: > >> To: Benjamin Grant <[email protected]> >> >> >> Most IRV in real world limits the rankings to 3 candidates per voter. >> In my approach, I treat the rankings as approval votes in the first round >> and tally up the number of times each candidate gets "ranked" to >> determine 3 finalists.There are 10 ways to rank 3 finalists so I sort the >> votes into these 10 categories, tally them up and use the info to have an >> instant runoff vote among the 3 finalists. >> >> Ben, this is the approach that I said gave the same result for all of the >> cases you brought up in your initial email to the list, which illustrated >> why you thought IRV was flawed. >> dlw >> >> >> >> ---- >> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list >> info >> >> >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
