I'm sorry, but aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhh. I think that people on this list are smart, but this is pathetic. I don't mean to be hard on Dave in particular. But why is it impossible to get any two of us to agree on anything? I want to make a list of systems which are
1. Commonly agreed to be better than approval. 2. Commonly agreed to be simple for an average voter to feel that they understand what's going on. I am not asking each person who responds to choose the best or simplest system according to them. I'm asking everyone to vote in the poll<http://betterpolls.com/do/1425> and approve (rate higher than 0) all systems which meet those two very low bars. Hopefully, the result will be a consensus. It will almost certainly not be the two best, simplest systems by any individual's personal reckoning. As to the specific comments: 2011/7/8 Dave Ketchum <da...@clarityconnect.com> > What I see: > . Condorcet - without mixing in Approval. > You need some cycle-breaker. Implicit approval is the only order-N tiebreaker I know; fundamentally simpler than any order-N² tiebreaker like minimax. You don't have to call it approval if you don't like the name. > . SODA - for trying, but seems too complex. > I disagree, but I'm biased. I feel that "approve any number of candidates or let your favorite candidate do it for you; most approvals wins" is easy to understand. But I can understand if people disagree, so I'm not criticizing this logic. > . Reject Approval - too weak to compete. > Worse than plurality???????? JQ
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
