I agree with Rob. All the different unusual pairwise preferences sets (disjoint, cyclic or containing equal preferences or any combinations) are a contribution to the election. It only uses other votes to precise its linear ccomplete ranking equivalent. Is that a good choice for a voter? Personnally, I do not like to copy on the majority, but if some want to follow the mainstream as sheeps.... It's a free election, no?
Steph Rob Brown a écrit : > I will give you that your example demonstrates that if your choices alone were > to decide the outcome, a system that only ranks the candidates can be somewhat > insufficient. > > However, let's assume that the ranking system in question allows you to, > rather than flipping a coin, simply rank A and B equally. In other words, > declare them a tie. > > Now, since your ballot is *not* the only one that decides the outcome, the > other voters will make your decision between A and B for you, exactly as you > wished. > > It does what you want, only in a far more straightforward way. Instead of > allowing you to vote for a choice based on the votes of others, it simply > allows you to defer to others things that you would rather not decide yourself. > > It is almost like you are insisting that you be able to explicitly vote for > whoever wins, rather than just not vote. What is the point? > > ---- > Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info