On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 15:30:39 -0800 (PST), Forest Simmons wrote: > Ted, it looks like most list members prefer ordinal ballots with approval > cutoffs to graded ballots. Perhaps those of us who like graded ballots are > not vocal enough.
Hmm, did I miss something? Or is it just a majority of those expressing a preference? ;-) Or is there a poll somewhere? > > I like graded ballots, and I think that (for public proposal) the standard > A,B,C,D,F scale is sufficient, with C as the default LPG slot. Allowing > +/- options would triple the resolution. Sure, that seems reasonable. For most voters, 3 approved ("passing grade") and 2 unapproved ranks would be ample and fairly self-explanatory. Plus/minus options could be useful in case you want to insert a candidate in between, and would give up to 9 approved and 6 disapproved grade levels without specifying a different LPG. And of course in that case you would make C-minus the default LPG. Which begs the question, why bother with an LPG option at all? Dave Ketcham has suggested 9 options on an ordinal ballot. Feel free to start editing this page: http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/index.php?title=Graded_Ballot&action=edit > > Of course, I've been grading students that way for nearly thirty years > now, so it seems pretty natural to me. I will run it by my friends to see if it passes the 'simple enough to understand' test. > > I understood your explanation about the advantages of using the LPG option > (i.e. not approving all graded candidates) but I think it is more > confusing than helpful. If you move the default LPG to midrange, that > part of the explanation could simply be ... > > "The grades you assign to your disapproved candidates will help determine > which of them wins in the event that none of your approved candidates > wins." Succinct. Thanks! > > My Best, > > Forest > > Ted -- araucaria dot araucana at gmail dot com ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info