Warren Smith wrote: > A voting system is "naive-exag-proof" if its winners do not change when the > labeling of two candidates as "frontrunners" is altered to another two > and all (or in another version, just some, the rest being honest) voters use > naive-exag strategy only. > This is a far weaker notion than Gibbard/Satterthwaite "strategyproof." > > Are there any interesting naive-exag-proof voting systems?
Systems that allow for continuous vote shifting, where the voters can see the changing results in real time, are naive-exag-proof. In such systems, the differences between perception and reality vanish. A candidate is either a frontrunner, or is not. Labels to the contrary will be ignored, and will have no effect on the results. -- Michael Allan Toronto, 647-436-4521 Skype michael_c_allan http://zelea.com/ ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
