Dear Dave! You wrote: > > Absolutely! I have often argued here that preferences are not linear and > > that we should allow voters to express undecidedness when one of their > > criteria says A>B and the other says B>A, instead of forcing them to > > either vote A=B or weigh their criteria in this case. > > > > Huh? I keep promoting A=B for voters to be able to be neutral between a > pair.
Yes, but you can be neutral because all your criteria tell you that both are equivalent or because one of your criteria favours one candidate and another criterion the other one. The first situation is what I call "equivalence", the second is what I call "undecidedness". > I choke on a ballot with contradictions such as A>B together with > A<B, Me, too. That was not what I suggested. I suggested the voter should optimally be allowed to express *undecidedness*, that is, be allowed to mark any of the four possibilities A>B B>A A=B undecided between A and B for each pair A,B. Of course that is too complicated for a paper ballot, but I was talking theory here. Yours, Jobst _________________________________________________________________________ Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail können Sie eine SMS an alle Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179 ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
