[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting

On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 09:38:38AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 23:18, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I *am* making the assumption that a signficant number of voters will, even
> > within a slate of options preferred over the do-nothing default, vote
> > conservatively.
> Then we can say nothing besides "that is the will of the electorate." 

See my reply to Lukas Geyer for why I think this is a fallacious

> However, even so, that means (given):
> 	Option A: strike SC 5
> 	Option B: trivial, editorial change
> 	Option C: A + B
> 	Option D: Further Discussion
> we're going to get the 'activists' voting CABD and the insecure voting

No, they might vote BACD because this sorts the substantive options in
increasing order of disruption to the Social Contract.  It is irrational
to rank A above C if you're trying to be "conservative" (but not so
conservative that you rank D first, saying "damn all changes")?

(Of course, this presumes that "conservatives" act rationally, which
I admit is ill-supported by observation.)

> The insecure won't vote against (rank below default) the real
> changes if they like them[1]. So, as long as there are sufficient
> 'activists', I conclude[2] that C will still win.

Hmm.  If my scenario is correct, B wins because the activists ranking C
above A are cancelled by the insecure moderates ranking A above C.

So B might win, validating the utility of the manipulative strategy.

> I fear the alternative is to have someone arbitrarily refuse to put
> options on the ballot, and that that would prevent free and fair
> elections.

Well, not necessarily, but it's certainly an awesome power that could be
awesomely abused.

> Condorcet can give an arbitrary number of winners. Cloneproof SSD
> attempts to resolve that. Cloneproof SSD is _supposed_ to be essentially
> immune to "cloned" candidates, like how B is a clone of D. 

I admit I'm fuzzy on how that part of Cloneproof works.  Guess I'd
better go re-browse electionmethods.org.  :)

G. Branden Robinson                |     If you have the slightest bit of
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     intellectual integrity you cannot
branden@debian.org                 |     support the government.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- anonymous

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: