That'll teach me to say,"Nobody can deny!"
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Bart Ingles wrote:
>
>
> Forest Simmons wrote:
> >
> > 40 BUVWCXYZA
> > 25 UVWCABXYZ
> > 35 AUVWBXYZC
> >
> > In this version (Blake's example with steroids) nobody can deny that some
> > of the candidates are much better than
Bart Ingles wrote:
>
> Forest Simmons wrote:
> >
> > 40 BUVWCXYZA
> > 25 UVWCABXYZ
> > 35 AUVWBXYZC
> >
> > In this version (Blake's example with steroids) nobody can deny that some
> > of the candidates are much better than others, for example U is strongly
> > preferred over Z by all the voter
Forest Simmons wrote:
>
> 40 BUVWCXYZA
> 25 UVWCABXYZ
> 35 AUVWBXYZC
>
> In this version (Blake's example with steroids) nobody can deny that some
> of the candidates are much better than others, for example U is strongly
> preferred over Z by all the voters.
Not necessarily; suppose ratings
Thanks to Blake Cretney for the example below!
Immediately below that I beef his example up to show in stark relief
IRV's failure to detect that there actually is a best and a worst.
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Blake Cretney wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:02:12 +
> Martin Harper <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:02:12 +
Martin Harper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Forest Simmons wrote
>
>
> > is it possible for IRV to pick the same candidate as both the best
and the
> > worst? In other words, is there a pair of examples which are
identical
> > except for the reversal of prefer
Can anything be salvaged from IRV? I think so: it's an ill wind indeed
that blows no good at all.
One idea implicit in IRV is this: Keep eliminating the worst candidates
from the rankings until the best choice among the remaining candidates is
obvious.
The idea is appealing. I like it, and I s
Here's some more (as threatened):
An example of iteration:
We start with rankings and a crude method for picking the winner.
Rankings:
34% A>B>C
36% C>B>A
30% B>A>C
Crude Starting Method: Method_0 is just the one we mentioned last time ...
choosing the candidate with the least number of last
Forest Simmons wrote
> is it possible for IRV to pick the same candidate as both the best and the
> worst? In other words, is there a pair of examples which are identical
> except for the reversal of preference directions, that both have the same
> winner when IRV is applied?
According to http
