On Oct 18, 2006, at 23:55 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I assume you mean the "later no harm" property?
Yes, but also any other variants that fall between IRV and Condorcet. > In effect, this means that you cannot look at a later choice on a > ballot until you are sure one of the following 3 conditions is true > > a) the candidate at the current choice is already elected > b) the candidate at the current choice cannot be elected > c) the later choices can in no way affect the election of the > current choice Maybe: c) the later choices can in no way REDUCE THE PROBABILITY OF election of the current choice IRV/Condorcet hybrids could also not have a "current choice" in IRV style but maybe something more Condorcet like. (don't know, not proposing that such nice methods can be found) Juho Laatu > c) folds in on a) and b) as if later choices cannot affect election/ > elimination of the current candidate then you already know if the > candidate is elected or eliminated. > > In effect, the process has to be: > > 1) Look at all first choices > 2) elect and/or eliminate some candidates based on current choice > total > 3) reweight ballots and recompute totals using the highest > candidate on each ballot still undecided > 4) goto 2) unless all seats filled > > Basically, all you will have is a list of candidates and a total > for each candidate. You don't know voter rankings as you are not > allowed to look at them. How can you determine who is elected or > eliminated ? IRV seems the only reasonable way of doing it. The > only possible other piece of info is the rankings of eliminated and > elected candidates, but I don't see how useful they would be. > > Maybe asset voting could be used. After the round, each candidate > can give some/all his votes to other candidates. Any candidate > above the quota gets elected, and also candidates can resign. Each > ballot is then rescaled based on what percentage was "spent" by its > current holder. However, if asset voting is used, then there is no > point in doing IRV as well. I guess it could be used as a deadlock > breaker or something. > > Raphfrk > -------------------- > Interesting site > "what if anyone could modify the laws" > > www.wikocracy.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; election-methods@electorama.com > Sent: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 9:24 PM > Subject: Re: [EM] IFNOP Method (was Re: Question about Condorcet > methods) > > Maybe there is some potential in doing the IRV style "never > considering all the given opinions" in some better way. I don't > have any opinion yet on if this is that case but maybe something > can be found. Juho Laatu > Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry- > leading spam and email virus protection. > ---- > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for > list info Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info