Re: It isn't quite Condorcet's method.
[The first time I replied to this message, I forgot to send a
copy to the list]
In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to >see
what
would be gained.
That question is answered at:
http://www.debian.org/~stevegr/voting/
There, I talk about a number of criteria for comparing voting
systems, and show an example in which, with the current count
rule, some truncation (voting of short rankings) causes a
violation of expressed majority wishes. So, one thing that
would be gained would be much better assurance about things like
that, as measured by those criteria.
Also, the circular tie solution currently in use is nonmonotonic,
meaning that if you change your vote so as to rank someone higher,
you can thereby make him lose, and if you change your vote so as
to rank someone lower, you can thereby make him win.
I realize that circular ties don't occur frequently here, maybe
because usually there's one alternative or candidate who is
a clear favorite. But then there's that occasion when there
is a circular tie.
Besides, isn't technical perfection sometimes a worthwhile
thing for its own sake? You're using a pairwise count method
because you want something better than non-pairwise methods.
And it is. So I made my suggestion because maybe you're interested
in the best.
And of course the possible value of the example that debian would
be setting in that way is incalculable.
Mike Ossipoff
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Reply to: