Hi, --- Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > > > Seemed simple, I was "exaggerating." > > > > > > But wait! If I vote this way, it must be that I prefer A to B with > > > more strength than I prefer B to C. So the conditions of the problem > > > are contradictory. > > What I'm saying is that "I really want A to win" > is a sincere preference that is expressed by > bullet voting for A, and zero-rating B. If I > don't care so much, but I prefer A over all > others, I can rate A at max and B at some > intermediate rating. It all depends on how much I care. > > The problem is that we have this idea of > exaggeration. But why would one exaggerate? > *Because they care.* In other words, it is not an exaggeration.
You can similarly say that if I rob a bank at gunpoint, I must have genuinely needed the money. I don't really mind if you want to define strategic voting out of existence. I don't think it sheds light on anything, though. I mean, it's trivial for me to imagine myself in a Range election with a variety of personal ratings for many candidates. Since I personally don't vote with enough uncertainty to want to undermine my own voting power (going to the polls is enough of an inconvenience), I would vote approval-style. And here you're basically saying you have enough confidence in me, some random voter, to trust that I must truly care deeply about this separation of the candidates into two sets. Kevin Venzke ___________________________________________________________________________ Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses http://fr.answers.yahoo.com ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info