Hi,
Steven J. Brams and M. Remzi Sanver wrote this in a Dec 2005 paper:
"A majority-preferred candidate is likely to have a more coherent point of
view than an AV winner, who may be the most popular candidate because he or
she is bland and inoffensive - a kind of lowest denominator who tries to
appease everybody. *Not* choosing such a candidate makes PAV [a hybrid
method proposed in this paper] *coherence-inducing for candidates* by
giving an advantage to candidates who are principled but, nevertheless,
command broad support."
In this paper ("Voting Systems That Combine Approval and Preference") they
also "propose" Bucklin, understanding that all ranked candidates should be
considered "approved."
>From the abstract and introduction: "Information on the rankings and
information on the approval of candidates in an election ... are [both]
important in the determination of social choices."
Kevin Venzke
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail
http://mail.yahoo.fr
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
