Le lundi 19 avril 2021 à 12:46:38-0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > "Barak A. Pearlmutter" <barak@pearlmutter.net> writes: > > > Sam, you make an excellent point about gaps between options, and that > > a ranking does not show the strength of preferences. Like, I might > > prefer ALPHA >>> BETA > GAMMA while you prefer ALPHA > BETA >>> GAMMA. > > So if it's down to ALPHA vs BETA, my vote should shift things more > > than yours, while if it's down to BETA vs GAMMA, your vote should > > shift things more than mine. And if we do sorta-maybe try to encode > > this with where FD is in the ranking, it does not actually have this > > effect. > > > If we wanted to encode this information more fully, we would have to > > go with some system where people give numeric strengths to each gap in > > their preferences. And to avoid people just pegging them all to > > maximum strength, we'd have to put a limit on the total strength in a > > single ballot. > > I think it's worth observing that this discussion started with "our voting > system is too complicated and I think some people are making nonsense > votes because of it" and has now arrived at "we should make our voting > system considerably more complicated to improve its expressive power." > > This all seems extremely speculative. Is there some GR whose result you > think did not accurately represent the correct outcome given the > preferences of the people who voted? Precisely what problem are you > trying to solve here? I think we are good ad nitpicking and this is some of it. :p (more seriously, I think our system does quite correclty what it is designed to do) -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature