--yep. Only reason I did what I did was simplicity (kind of a pain if voters have to submit both a range-type and a condorcet or approval-type ballot). But your way is better in that it tends to yield a better winner than my way.
Also, note -- which is even more obnoxious -- we could have each voter submit TWO ratings-style ballots, the "honest range ballot" and the "dishonest range ballot"; then the HRB is used to decide between DHR and random ballot... On 11/20/09, Raph Frank <raph...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is effectively performing random ballot and then giving the > voters the option to roll the dice a second time. > > Any single seat method could be used to select the first candidate. > If you used a good single seat method to pick the compromise winner, > then the random ballot would rarely if ever be activated. > > For example. > > 1) Voters submit ratings ballot and also a ranked or an approval ballot > 2) Determine the winner using condorcet or approval (or other method) > 3) Determine the random ballot odds for each candidate > 4) If a majority prefer the winner in 2 to the expectation in 3), then > the winner from 2 wins. > 5) Otherwise, use the random method > > Ofc, using a majority instead of a unanimous decision breaks some of > the properties of the pure consensus method. > -- Warren D. Smith http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking "endorse" as 1st step) and math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info