Hello Ken,
Nice ideas. Correlation seems like a useful tool that could be applied
also elsewhere than with Borda. It sure is more natural (and wider)
than the normal clone definitions (unfortunately not as simple but of
course so are peoples' opinions).
Borda has some problems with strategic voting (e.g. burying the worst
competitor at the end of the list). But also voting methods that are
intended for honest men (that you mentioned) are interesting and useful
too.
Since I mentioned the usefulness of honest men dependent "sincere"
methods I'll give also one example. Strategic voting related defensive
requirements could be relaxed when a group of experts vote on what
shares to buy with their joint money. All want to take the benefit of
each others' expertise (and have no interest in pushing their own
(maybe limited) viewpoints through). In this case (more "sincerity
dependent") voting methods like Borda or sum of ratings may be the best
choice.
On May 31, 2005, at 23:41, Ken Kuhlman wrote:
To again summarize Saari,
this is equivelant to telling a husband and wife team with
diametrically
opposed views that it's OK if they don't vote, because the election
method in
use understands that their views cancel eachother out.
Eliminating looped votes (A>B>C, B>C>A, C>A>B) is a very different
thing (and more problematic) to me than eliminating reverse votes
(A>B>C, C>B>A).
Best Regards,
Juho
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
