Re: Range Voting - the simpler better alternative to Condorcet voting
"Barak A. Pearlmutter" <barak@cs.nuim.ie> writes:
> It is pretty straightforward to add some extra candidates whose
> existence causes voters to "use up" their default option elsewhere on
> the ballot, below the dark horse candidate.
I'm still a bit in the dark. Why would a voter want to vote ADXBC
instead of AXDBC if he doesn't want any of the candidates B,C and D to
win (A,B,C are the "serious" candidates, D is the universally hated
dark horse, and X is None of the below)? In my understanding, ranking
NOTB above a candidate means that that candidate will have a slightly
harder time to meet the quorum, which is what the voter actually
wants.
Let's take some figures:
A - 31 supporters
B - 32 supporters
C - 37 supporters
D - 0 supporters
In Debian system, Q would then be 5 and the quorum 15. Honest voting
would mean:
31x ACBXD
32x BCAXD
37x CBAXD
A,B and C would meet the quorum easily, D wouldn't. C would win by a
fair margin.
If all voters rank other serious candidates below NOTB:
31x AXCBD
32x BXCAD
37x CXBAD
Now, nobody meets the quorum and everybody is sort-of happy, with the
election going to be re-run.
If voters rank D above NOTB:
31x ADXCB
32x BDXCA
37x CDXBA
D wins, nobody but D is happy.
I don't see why the voters would choose the last strategy, as it
produces the worst result, whereas the second strategy produces only a
not-so-good result.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *
Reply to: